The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI S.GQPAL BAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SEBVICES ll The court rnade the follgyying; OB9FR I l I THE HON'BLE SRI J(ISTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.8268 of2O25 ORDER: Heard Sri S. Gopal Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, Iearned Government Pleader for Services-Il for respondent s.

2.ThisWritPetitionislrledtodirecttherespondentsto regularize the services of the petitioners from the date of their initial appointment.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners \vere initially appointed on Daily Wage basis as Lab Boy/Watchman on 1a.l2.lg8g and' 22.07-1991 respectively and since then they have been working without any blemish' By now' they have compteted more than 34 years of service' as such' they are entitled for regularization of their services in the Last Grade Service (Class-lV category)' The Government has issued G.o.Ms.No.2l2,Finance&Planning(Fw.PC.III)Depaftment, d.ated 22.O4.1994, providing regularization of services of NMRs' But so far the services of the petitioners have not been regularized. 3(i) It is the further case of the petitioners that the l"t respondent issued G'O'Rt'No' 1017, Agriculture and Co- 2 07 .O9.20I 1, according operation (Agri.IV) Department, dated permission to the 2,d respondent to allow the payment of remuneration (a) minimum time scale to the petitioners and another, accordingly the 3.d respondent has rssued proceedings dated 20.09.2011 sanctioning minimum time scale to the petitioners. The petitioners have been discharging their duties on par with regular employees from the date of their initial appointment and by now they have completed more than 34 years of service. 3 (ii) Ir is the further case of the petitior_rers that on repeated requests of petitioners for regularization of their servlces, whereupon the 4rh respondent r.e. The District a Agriculture Officer, Lr.No.At1835 /2otl. Sanga Reddy District, addressed dated 12.i0.2018 to the 2"d re sponden t the Commissioner & Director of Agriculture. Hyderabad, recommending for regular ization of the petitioners, services in Class-IV category and to submit petitioners, applications to the Government, but so far nothing has been proceedecl further and the petitioners are being denied regularization of their services unyustly. ,/r 3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though it is recommended by the 4th respondent to the 2"a respondent for regularization of the petitioners' services in Class-IV category and to submit the petitioners' applications to the Government' till date nothing has been proceeded further and he relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jaggo Vs. tlnion of Indta & otherst

5. A perusal of the record shows that on 19'O3'2025' the learnedcounselforrespondentssoughttimeforgetting instructions, as such, this Court adjourned the case and posted to 26.O3.2025. On that date also, learned counsel for respondents sought time for getting instructions' as such' this Court adjourned the case and posted lo O1'o4'2O25 On that day, at the request of the learned counsel for respondents' case was posted to 07 .O4.2O25' Even on that day also' no instructions were produced, as such, the matter was posted to 15.04.2025 for Iiling counter' Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, neither instructions were produced nor counter is frled, as such, this Court proceeded with decide the case on ments. ' sr.p( c ) ss80 of zo24 dtzo.12.2024 4

6. In the above referred Jaggo case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court at para No.27 observed as under: "27. In liqht of these <'onsiderations, in our opinion, it is imperatiue for gouemment departments to lead bg example in prouidingl fair (lnd slobl" entploAmt,nl. Engaging workers on a teolporary hosis for ertended peiods, especiallg uhen their roles are integrol to the orgotizatior's functiorting, not onlA contraueles internetiotlal labour strz,zd.ards but also exposes the organization to Leqal challenges and urtdermtnes emplogee morale. Bg ensururl lair emplollttenl prectices, gouenunett i,lsliturions can reduce the burden ofurtrtecessary liligalion. prorrtote job seanritg, and uphold the pturcipLes of jtLstice and fairness that the! ore meent to embodg. This approach cttigns uith internqtional standards and sets a positiue precedent for the piuate sector to follow, ther",bA contibuting to the overa bettennent of labour practices in the countr!1. " 7 . In vieu, of ratio laid down in the above judgment and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, without going into the merits of the case, the respondents are directed to consider case of the petitioners for regularization of their services in the Last Grade Service (Class- IV category) in accordance with law, within a period of (08) eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. a 5 f

8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/.P. PADMANABHA REDDY EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To De partment, 'l The PrinciP al Secretary, Ag riculture and Co-oPerati o Secretariat Building s, Hyde rabad, State of Telangana The Commissioner and Director of Agriculture, GrouP Flo gh, Hyd tvlaidan, Basheeraba The Joint Director of Agricult ure Officer, gricult The District A tary, Finance DePa Secre The PrinciPal Hvd erabad, State of Telangana One CC to SRI S GOPAL RAO, Advocate IOPUC Two CCq to GP FOR SERVICE$- ll, High C ourt for the State of Telangana, at Hyderqbad. [OUT] erabad ure, Sang a ReddY, Sang a Reddy District District Sanga ildings, Secret ariat Sanga ReddY, rtment, or, B-Block, Fateh- Reddy Bu 2 a 4 E 6 7

8. Two C D Copies PSK. I]S HIGH COURT DATED:1 510412025 \ I I I ORDER WP.No.8268 of 2025 t.) \ xE s;rar€ 0a flAY rus ! { I a QtSPATCH90 t DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS D(