SCOTT v. EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM

This action involves additional litigation arising out of the illegal discharge of Olon E. Scott as an employee of the Department of Revenue. See Scott v. Undercofler, 108 Ga. App. 460 ( 133 S.E.2d 444); Undercofler v. Scott, 220 Ga. 406 ( 139 S.E.2d 299); and Scott v. Undercofler, 220 Ga. 711 ( 141 S.E.2d 415). In the present case the plaintiff, Olon E. Scott, seeks a declaratory judgment as to his rights under the Employees' Retirement System of Georgia. The trial court sustained the defendant's general demurrer to the plaintiff's petition and it is to such judgment that the plaintiff excepts.

NICHOLS, Presiding Judge.

The plaintiff alleges that the Employees' Retirement System of Georgia refuses to recognize his eligibility for retirement benefits which he alleges he is entitled to as a result of service as an employee of the State Revenue Department, which service was terminated prior to the filing of the present action. Accordingly, whatever rights the plaintiff has under the Retirement System of Georgia Act (Ga. L. 1949, p. 138), as amended ( Code Ann. Ch. 40-25), have already accrued, and no facts are alleged which show the plaintiff is in danger of taking some future undirected action which if taken without judicial direction might reasonably jeopardize his rights.

"The petition shows that whatever rights the plaintiff has have already accrued. State Hwy. Dept. v. Georgia, F. c. R. Co., 216 Ga. 547, 548 ( 117 S.E.2d 897), and 216 Ga. 812, 813 ( 120 S.E.2d 122). It does not show that the plaintiff is in danger of taking some future undirected action, which if taken without judicial direction might reasonably jeopardize his rights. Rowan v. Herring, 214 Ga. 370, 373 ( 105 S.E.2d 29); Pinkard v. Mendel, 216 Ga. 487, 490 ( 117 S.E.2d 336); Brewton v. McLeod, 216 Ga. 686, 691 ( 119 S.E.2d 105). The Declaratory Judgments Act, Code Ann. § 110-1101 et seq., makes no provision for a judgment which is merely advisory. Shippen v. Folsom, 200 Ga. 58, 59 ( 35 S.E.2d 915); Liner v. City of Rossville, 212 Ga. 664 ( 94 S.E.2d 862); Henderson v. Alverson, 217 Ga. 541, 542 ( 123 S.E.2d 721)." Bryant v. Clark Glass c. Co., 109 Ga. App. 606, supra.

Accordingly, since the plaintiff's petition failed to set forth facts entitling him to a declaratory judgment the judgment of the trial court sustaining the defendant's general demurrer and dismissing the plaintiff's petition must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed. Hall and Deen, JJ., concur.