1. Dasari Ranga Swamy v. 1. Union of lndia

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF CEOTARARI or any other appropriate Writ or direction by calling for the records in the Judgment and order passed by the Hon'ble central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench in O.A. No. 28512022 Ot. 15-03-2024 and quash and set-aside the same and by declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not implementing scheme of 1/30 of the minimum wages in terms of the orders of the Government of tndra in oM No, 4901412186 Estt. (c) issued by Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and pensions (Department of personnel and rraining, Government of lndia Dt. 07-06-19g8 regarding the of minimum wages to casual workers wherein decision has been taken to pay of i /30th of the pay of minimum relevant pay scare, prus Dearness Alowances for work of g hours, a day as illegar, arbitrary and viorative of Articres 14 and 16 of the constitution of lndia and also the principles of natural justice and consequentially direct the respondent authorities to pay minimum wages to the petitioner regarding grant of minimum wages to casual workers wherein decision has been taken to pay of 1/30th of the pay of minimum rerevant pay scare, prus Dearness Allowances for work of I hours, a day from the date of their appointment as casual labours and also in accordance with the order passed by this Honble court in W.P. No 2407512024, Dt. OZ-O9-2024. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M.SALEEM lgunsel for the Respondents : SRt cADt PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUW SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following ORDER t I THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA WRIT PETITION No.12802OF 2025 ORDER: (Per Hon ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili) When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners has informed the Court that the issue raised in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by the order, dated

02.09.2024, passed by this Court in W.P.No.24075 of 2024 and following the said order, dated 02.09.2024, the present Writ Petition also deserves to be disPosed of. 2 Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents did not dispute the same.

3. [n view of the same, this Court is of the considered view that the present Writ Petition can also be disposed of in terms of the order, dated 02.09.2024, passed by this Court in W'P.No'24075 of

2024. 4 Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of following the order, dated 02.09.2024, passed by this Court in W'P'No'24075 of

2024. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners in terms of the office Memorandum, dated 07.06.19gg, and also take steps for fixation of pay of the petitioners, preferabry within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents are also directed to examine the case of the petitioners in terms of the order, dated 02.02.2024, passed in O.A.No.99 of 2022 by the Cenkal Adminiskative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad. There shalr be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. A. SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR "lt' SECTiON OFFICER To

1. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Culture, New Delhi. 2. The Director General, Archaeological Survey of lndia, 24 Tilak [Varg, New Delhi - 110011.

3. The Superintending, Archaeologist, Archaeological Survey of lndia, Hyderabad Circle, Kendriya Sadan,3rd Floor,2nd Block, Sultan Bazar, Koti, Hyderabad - 500095.

4. One CC to SRI M.SALEEM, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUI!,IAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF lNDIA, Advocate [OPUC]

6. Two CD Copies (Along with the Copy of Court Order dt:02/09/2024 in W.P.No.24075 ot 2024) SA GJ d r t ,38a.; €---T:= I HIGH COURT DATED:2510412025 ORDER WP.No.12802 of 2025 THE S T4 ( Ro c 1 7 JUL 2025 DAJ a o () t t DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. \6 (- t THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANAALISHETTY Writ Petition No.24O75 of 2024 ORDER: per the Hon'ble Sn Justice Abhinand Kumat St&uili) Aggrieved by the order, dated 15.03.2024, passed in O.A.No.285 of 2022 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad (for short, the TribunalJ, the present Writ Petition is filed.

2. Heard Sri M. Saleem, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri Anurag, learned counsel representing learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners had contended that all the petitioners were working as Causal Labours with the respondents and they are entitled for fixation of their pay scale in terms of Office Memorandum, dated

07.06.1988. However, the respondents are not extending the said benefit to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended that similarly situated employees have approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.No.2L4 of 2O2l and the Tribunal was pleased 2 AKS,J & LNA,J \tlp _2407 5 _2024 to allow the said O.A. uide order, dated 30.09.2021 and directed the respondents to extend the benefits to the petitioners on similar terms as granted to similarly placed persons. Learned counsel had further contended that earlier orders passed by the Tribunal were implemented by the respondents, however, the Tribunal has dismissed the O.A. filed by the petitioners, rvithout appreciating any of the contentions raised by the petitioners

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended that the Tribunal has'dismissed the case filed by the petitioners only on the ground that the petitioners could not produce certain documents. When the petitioners are working with the respondents, all the documents and Service Record would be available with the respondents and it is for the respondents, who should have examined the case of the petitioners.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended that they are similarly placed as that of the applicants in O.A.No.99 of 2022, dated 02.O2.2024 and the Tribunal ought to have directed the respondents to 3 AKS,J & LNA,J '$,P 2407 5_2024 exarnine the case of the petitioners, where they aIe similarly situated persons as that of the applicants in O.A.No.99 of 2022. Therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the Writ Petition by setting aside the order, dated 15.03.2024 passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.285 of 2022 and allow the Writ Petition and further direct the respondents to extend the benefits of applicants 1n O.A.No.99 of 2022 to the petitioners also.

6. On the other hand, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents had contended that the Tribuna-l waqjustified in dismissing the O.4., AS admittedly, the petitioners have not produced any documents to prove that they are entitled for the benefits of Office Memorandum, dated

07.06.1988. Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India further contended that the petitioners were neither appointed against any sanctioned post nor were appointed following the regular selection process. Hence, they are not entitled for the benelits of Office Memorandum, dated 07.06.1988. Therefore, there are no 4 AKS,J & LNA,J wp 240752024 merits in the Writ Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

7. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by both the partieS, is of the view that when the petitioners were contending that since they are similarly placed as that of the applicants 1n O.A.No.99 of 2022, dated O2.02.2024, the Tribunal should have disposed of the O.A. directing the respondents to examine the case of the petitioners as to whether they are similarly situated persons as that of the applicants in O.A.No.99 of 2022, dated 02.O2.2024, instead of dismissing the O.A. Therefore, order dated

15.03.2024 passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.285 of 2022 is liable to be set aside and accordingly, it is set aside.

8. The Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to submit a detailed representations seeking the benehts of Office Memorandum, dated 07.06.1988 and also for hxation of their pay, preferably, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of 5 AKS,J & LNA,J w_24075 2024 this order. Upon such representation being received, the respondents are directed to examine the case of the petitioners as to whether they are entitled for benefits of Office Memorandum, dated 07.06.1988 and also examine whether they are similarly placed as that of the applicants in O.A.No.99 of 2022, dated O2.02.2024 ar.d pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

9. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

10. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Date: O2.O9.2024