Andhra Pradesh HC Hears Plea Filed Against Deferment Of Salaries And Pension

Must Read

Kerala High Court Rejects Writ Petition for Rejection of Loan Application

Case: Anvardeen. K v. Union of India. Coram: Justice P.V. Asha On 24th November 2020, The Kerala High Court involving a...

Supreme Court: Maritime Board Must Not Wallow in Inaction and Be Arbitrary in Its Contractual Duties

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that a State instrumentality such as the Maritime Board is expected...

Supreme Court: Right to Property Is a Constitutional Right, the Essence of Rule of Law Protects It

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that permitting the State to assert indefinite right upon one’s...

Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar To Issue Origin Certificates To Two Sisters in Two Writ Petitions

Two Writ Petitions by two siblings was filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The petitions owed to...

Delhi High Court Directs Centre and Delhi Govt To Consider a PIL Seeking Paid Menstrual Leave as Representation

The Delhi High Court had provided direction to consider a petition as representation. The Central and Delhi governments were...

Follow us

On March 31, 2020, The State Government had announced the deferment of salaries and pensions of its employees, including Chief Minister, IAS Officers and Ministers. The Government, claiming that all the revenue streams have totally dried up due to the lockdown, issued deferments ranging from 10 to 100 per cent for different categories of employees.

The Chief Minister, Ministers and Legislators were to get a 100% cut off their salaries. IAS, IPS, IFS and All-India Service Officers were to get a 60% cut while Class 2 and Class 3 employees suffer a 50% cut. The increase in demand for medical equipment, protection equipment, health facilities and financial assistance for the poor had put a strain on the reserves of the State.

The Government Order 26 issued by the State Government was challenged by Advocate Jandhyala Ravi Shankar who has filed a petition in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh against this matter. The petition was heard on Tuesday via video conference where Chief Justice Jitendra Kumar Maheswari granted one week’s time to the Advocate General to respond.

Arguments before the Court

Mr. Ravi Shankar argued that the State Government has no jurisdiction to issue instructions for deferment of pension. He further referred to the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, and the Disaster Management Act, 2005, to point out that there is no provision that empowers the Government to defer salaries or pensions. He claimed the liability of the G.O to be struck down.

Mr. Ravi Shankar also requested the Chief Justice to consider taking up the matter as s suo moto Public Interest Litigation in order to protect the life and liberties guaranteed to government pensioners under the Constitution of India.

While the Epidemic diseases Act, 1897, is a 123-year old legislation that gives the authorities full immunity against legal action if acted in good faith of the Act, these powers cannot be subject to interpretation and misuse in the current world. With the current situation, the Act needs to be subjected to a review in order to provide justice for those affected.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Supreme Court : High Courts Have Sole Authority Under Article 226 To Decide Validity of Tax Provision, Even if Matter Is Sub-Judice Before Income...

A Full Bench of the Supreme Court held that the validity of a provision is a serious matter which could only be decided by...

Kerala High Court Rejects Writ Petition for Rejection of Loan Application

Case: Anvardeen. K v. Union of India. Coram: Justice P.V. Asha On 24th November 2020, The Kerala High Court involving a single bench judge of the...

Supreme Court: Maritime Board Must Not Wallow in Inaction and Be Arbitrary in Its Contractual Duties

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court held that a State instrumentality such as the Maritime Board is expected to act without any arbitrariness...

Supreme Court: Right to Property Is a Constitutional Right, the Essence of Rule of Law Protects It

A Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that permitting the State to assert indefinite right upon one’s property, without any legal sanction...

Madras High Court Directs Tahsildar To Issue Origin Certificates To Two Sisters in Two Writ Petitions

Two Writ Petitions by two siblings was filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The petitions owed to the fact that they were...

Delhi High Court Directs Centre and Delhi Govt To Consider a PIL Seeking Paid Menstrual Leave as Representation

The Delhi High Court had provided direction to consider a petition as representation. The Central and Delhi governments were directed to consider the same....

Madras High Court Reiterates That ‘Ignorance of Law’ Is Not an Excuse and Dismisses Petition by a Constable

A Constable committed bigamy and deserted his service for more than 21 days. After dismissal from his service, he moved to Tamil Nadu Administrative...

Transfer of Winding-up Proceedings Allowed Under S. 434, Restrictions Under 2016 Rules To Not Apply: Allahabad High Court

This appeal relates to the question of transfer of winding-up proceeding from the High Court (Company Court) to the NCLT.  Facts M/s. Girdhar Trading Company, 2nd...

Constitutional Court of South Africa Declares Provisions of Domestic Workers’ Injury Compensation Legislation To Be Unconstitutional

The Constitutional Court of South Africa in Sylvia Mahlangu v Minister of Labour , declared parts of the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases...

Bail Granted Under Section 167(2) CrPC Can Be Cancelled Under Section 439(2) CrPC: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the right of default bail of the Accused can be cancelled under Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Facts...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -