Supreme Court · 2025

Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondents to a bso rblregurarize the service of the petitioner in a crear aided vacant post of Lab boy or in any other aided crass rV post in 4th and 5th respondent cofiege with a[ arrears of sarary, -difference pay, and a[ other consequentiar benefits to the petitioner as soon as compretion of 10 years of service as on 10-42006 as per raw raid down by the Hon.bre Apex court of the Land reported in 2010 (1) Decision Today (sc) Supreme court of India dt.3-8- 2010 al page 358 i.e. in case of state of Karnataka v/s M.L.Kesari and as per the Judgment of the 'Hon'bre supreme court of India in Umadevi case reported in 2006 (4) SCC1. l.A.NO:10F 2016 PMP.NO:4390 3 0F 2016) Petition Under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondents to absorb/regurarize the service of the petitioner as a Lab Boy or in any other crass rv post in 4th respondent corege in the right of the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in 2010(1) Decisions Today (SC) 358 Supreme Court of lndia and also other Judgment reported in (2o15) I Supreme CourtCases26si.e.inAmarkanthRaiv/sStateofBiharandotherswherethe services of similarly situated persons were regularized' Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SADU RAJESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos'l & 3 : GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No'2 : GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING Counsel for the Respondent Nos'4 & 5 : M/s PRATUSHA BOPPANA W.P.NO:7 461 0 F 2015 Between: Sved Zakir Nehri, S/o Syed Ameenuddin Nehri' aged. ahout 42 vears' Occ Lab Boy' Workino in Mumtaz o"gt"Jl;i'Plb" b;ii;#'-(Aid"o1 nro H"No'22- I -874'Noor khin itLar, sultanpura, HYderabad' ....,PETITIONER AND

1. The state of Telangana, Rep-by the.Principal Secretary' H(7her Education (CE-2) Department, Secretariat' Hyoeraoao ' 2. The State of Telangana, Rep by the Principal Secretary' Finance and ' iL"";ift"D;pa rimdnt 5 e"reta ri it, H vd e ra bad' 3. The Collegiate Education, State of Telangana' Nampally' Hyderabad Rep' by 4. Mumtaz Degree& P.G'Col[ege (Aided)' Malakpet Hyderabad' Rep' by the '- 5. Mumtaz Degree & P.G'college (Aided)' Malakpet' Hyderabad' Rep' by the Secretary and ConesPondent' the Commissioner/Director' Principal ....RESPONDENTS PetitionUnderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflrrdiaprayirEthatinthe circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' ttp High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direc{ion more particularly one in the nature of writofMandamusunderAtticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaindechringthe inactiononthepartoftherespondentslto3inrrotabsorbing/regularizingthe service of the petitioner in a clear aided vacant post of Lab Boy by redeploying the pptitioner's servbe to any other Govemment Degree & P'G' col{ege in state of l I L I : I Telangana as soon as compretion of 10 years of service as on 10-04-2006 as per law raid down by the Hon'bre Apex court of the rand reported in 2010(1) Decision Today (SC) supreme court of rndia dt. 03-08-2010 at page 358 i.e., state of Karnataka & ors vs ML Kesari where in para 53 0f Umadevi case reported in 2006 (4) SCC 1 was crarified and thus said inaction as iregar arbitrary and viorative of Articre 14 and 21 0f the constitution of rndia and consequenry to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to absorb r regurarize the service of the petitioner in a clear aided vacant post of Lab Boy or in any other aided Class lV post by redeploying the petitioner's service as Lab Boy to any other needy Govemment Degree & p'G co*ege with a, arrears of sarary by refixing the pay scare of the petitioner w'e f 1 1-06-1 9g5 and difference of pay and a, other consequentiar benefits to the petitioner such as for payment of pension after attaining the age of superannuation as soon as compretion of 10 years of service as on .t0-04-2006. (As per court order dated 20-6-20 24 vide r.A.No.2 0t 2024in w.p.No.7461 0f 2015, pray* is amended) l.A.NO:l OF 2015 PMP. NO : 9905 OF 2015 Petition under Section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pteased direct the respondents to absorb/re gurarize the service of the petitioner in a crear aided vacant post of Lab boy or in any other aided crass rV post in 4th and Sth respondent co'ege with a, arrears of sarary, difference pay, and a, other consequentiar benefits to the petitioner as soon as compretion of 10 years of service as on 10-42006 as per raw raid down by'the Hon,bre Apex court of the Land reported in 2o1o (1) Decision Today (sc) supreme court of rndia dt.3_8- 2010 at page 35g i'e' in case of state of Karnataka v/s M.L.Kesari and as per the Judgment of the Hon'bre Supreme court of rndia in Umadevi case reported in 2006 (4) SCC1. t.A.NO: oF 201 1 PMP. NO:4418 OF 2016 Petition under section 151 cPc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondents to absorb/regurarize the .".i"" or the petitioner as a Lab Boy or in any other crass rV post in 4111 respondent corege in the right of the Judgment of the Apex court reported in 2010(1 ) Decisions Today (SC) 35B supreme court of rndia and arso other Judgment reported in (2015) B supreme court cases 265 i.e. in Amarkanth Rai v/s state of Bihar and others wherc the services of similarly situated persons were regularized. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SADU RAJESWARA REDDY Gounsel for the Respondent Nos.l & 3 : GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING Counsdl for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 : M/s PRATUSHA BOPPANA W.P.NO:25531 OF 2016 Between: Syed Khalid, S/o Khaja Moinuddin,.ageg. rFrl 19.Vguo' Occ Lab Boy-w-o+jlS-in r'rir*tii Cori"se, (A ilinority Aideb i-nstitution) Malakpet, ru-q^I-tr 1a-8-252124' uioeJonigir,hiydsathnagai, Hyderabad, Telangana state - 500059' .....PETITIONER AND

1. The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary, for Higher Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2.ThestateofTelangana,rep'byitsPrincipalsecretaryFinanceandPlanning Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

3. The Commissioner/ Director of Collegiate Education, State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

4. The Secretary & Conespondent, Mumtaz College (A Minority Aided lnstitution) Milakpet, Hyderabad.

5.ThePrincipal,MumtazCollege(AMinorityaidedlnstitution)Matakpet' Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleasedtoissue'a-writ,orderordirectionmoreparticularlyoneinthenatureof writ of mandamus in declaring inaction on the part of ttre respondents 1 to 3 in not absorbing / regularizing the service of the petitioner in a cbar aided vacant post ofLabBoybyredepfioyingthepetitioner'sservicetoanyotherGovernment Degree&P.G.collegeinstateofTelanganaassoonascomplet.tonofl0yearsof service as on 10{4-2006 as per law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court of the tand reported k\ 2o1o (1) Decision Today (SC) Supreme court of lndia dt. 03-08- 2o1o at page 358 i.e., State of Karnataka & ors vs ML Kesari where in para 53 of Umadevi case reported in 2006 (4) sc.o 1 was crarified and thus said inaction as illegal arbitrary and viorative of Articre 14 and 21 of the constitution of rndia and consequently to direct the respondents ,r to 3 to absorb I regularize the service of the petitioner in a crear aided vacant post of Lab Boy or in any other aided crass lV post by redeploying the petitioner's service as Lab Boy to any other needy Government Degree & p.G. College with all arrears of salary by refixing the pay scale of the petitioner w.e.f. 10_07-199F difference of pay and all other consequentiar benefits to the petitioner such as for payment of pension after attaining the age of superannuation as soon as compretion of 10 years of service as on 10-04-2006. (As per court order dated 20-6-2024 vide r.A.No.2 0f 2024 in w.p.No.25531 of 2016, prayer is amended) |.A.NO:1 OF 2016(WP MP. NO: 31536 OF 2016) Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in :support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the respondents 1 to s to absorb/regu rarize the service of the petitioner in a dear (Aided) vacant post of Lab Attender/Lab Boy w.e.f. .r0-07-199s i.e. from the date of initiar appointment of the petitioner by adding the notionar increments in fixing the pay scare cf the petitioner with continuity of service, for pensionary benefits and to pay the arrears of difference of pay to the petitioner tiil the date of absorbing/regurarizing the service of the petitioner in an Aided vacant post of Lab attender/Lab Boyin a crear added vacant post in. 4th and Sth respondent corege in the right of judgment reported in 2010 (1) decisions today (sc) dated 03-08- 2010 at Page 358 i.e. state of Kamataka v/s Umadevi and state of Karnataka v/s ML Kesari reported in (2010) I scc 247 and arso in the right of judgment reported in (2015) 8 supreme court cases 265 i.e. AmarkantRar v/s state of Bihar and others pending disposal of the above writ petition. t.A.NO :2OF 2O 17 P. NO:49343 oF 20 171 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to fire their counters in wp.No. 25531 0f 2016 forthwith I.A.NO:1 OF 2024 Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the Giroumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court rnay be pleased to permit the Petitioner to file an additional documents to prove that there are 11 clear aided vacant posts of Lab Boys which were admitted into grant in aid are available as on the date of filing of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI SADU RAJESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3 : GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : GP FOR FINANCE AND PLANNING Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5 : SRI SRINIVAS CHAMARTHY' ADVOCATE FOR SRI B.NALIN KUMAR The Court made the following COMMON ORDER I wp_7452 & 7451 2015 and wp_25531_2016 NB(, ] U CE A BH w PE TION Nos.7 452 a d7461of2 15 AND I COMMON ORDER The issue involved, so also the grievance, in these writ petitions being identical, they are analogously heard and are being disposed of by this Common 0rder.

2. W.P.No.7452 of 2OLS is filed by Syed Moieed Ahmed Savi, and W.P.No.7461, of 20lS is filed by Syed Zakir Nehri, who are working as Lab Boys in the 4t'respondent-Mumtaz Degree & p.G. College fAided) since 11.06.1995. Similarly, W.pNo.25531 of 20L6 is filed by Syed Khalid, working as Lab Boy in the same 4th respondent-college since 1,0.07 .L995. The petitioners are rendering services as Lab Boys against Aided vacancies for almost three decades now. They filed these writ petitions alleging inaction on the part of respondent authorities in absorbing/regularizing their services in clear aided vacant post of Lab Boy by re-deploying them to any other Government Degree & p.G college in the State on completion often years of service fi,om the date of their initial appointment as per the law laid down by the Hon, ble ? 2 wp 7452 &7461 m15 and WP-65X-2O16 Supreme Court in Shte of Karnataka v' M'L' Kesaril' wherein paragraph No.53 of State of Karnataka v' Umadeviz' was clarified and thus the inaction is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 2l oftheConstitutionoflndia,andconsequentlytodirectthe respondents 1 to 3 to absorb / regularize the services of the petitioners and re-fix their pay scale from the date of initial appointment and pay all arrears of salary and difference of pay' including granting of consequential benefits like for payment of pensionary benefits on superannuation'

3. Heard Mr. Sadu Rajeshwar Reddy' learned counsel for the petitioners; learned Government Pleader for Education for respondents-Deparrment of Collegiate Education; learned Government Pleader for Finance and Planning for respondents-Finance & Planning Department; and Mr. Srinivas Chamarthy' learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. B. Nalin Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos'4 and S-Mumtaz Degree & P'G' College'

4. The petitioners challenge the inaction of respondent authorities in regularizing their services as Lab Boy from the date of their initial appSurlttnent in the year 1995, and pray for a direction to notionally 1 (2010) 9 scf, 247 , (2006) 4 SCC 1 3 wp 7452 & 145r_2At5 ar d wp_25531_2016 N8X,.' regularize their services and re_fix their pay by adding notional increments in the 4tt' respondent college retrospectively from the date of their respective initial appointment dates in the year 1995, for the purpose of pen:;ionary benefits. They also seek redeployment to any other Department in case their post is surrendered to the Government by the 4ri, respondent-College, during pendency of these writ petitions.

5. The issue as to ,whether past ser-tices can be taken into consideration for the purpose of pension,, is no more res inte{lra. lt is settled law that past sewices prior to regularization can be counted for the purposes of pensionary benefits. Furthe4, it is not in dispute that the petitioners are qualified to render services as Lab Boys in the respondent No.4-co ege. The Hon'bre Supreme court in Umadevi (supra) has also distinguished between appointments that are illegal and irregular. It is not the case of either of the parties that the appointment of petitioners is either illegal or irregular.

6. Furthermore, in the instant case, it is not in dispute that the petitioners possess necessary qualifications to render services as Lab Boys, and they are working against aided vacancies and are rendering services for almost three decades, and therefore they are entitled to the benefit of judgment in Umadevi (supra). As the petitioners have I : j I i I ! l. 4 wp-74s2 & 7461-2015 and wp-25s31-2t16 r'- been working for more than 10 years as stipulated in Umadevi' they are entitled to regularization, including re-deployment to any other Department, akin to the cases of surPlus emPloYees of a merged/dissolved Department, in case their existing post of Lab Boy happened to have been surrendered to the Government by the 4d respondent-College. It would be relevant to note at this juncture that a similar issue 7. with regard to counting of past service for pensionary benefits fell for consideration before this Court in W'P'No'24580 of 2015' which is a case of one Mohd. Naseeruddin Farooqi who was also discharging - duties as a Lab Boy in the very same 4d respondent-Mumtaz College' This Court, by order dated 29.01.2024,by referring to judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in M'L' Kesari (supra); Amarkant Rai v' State ofBihar3,andtheiudgmentofHon,bleHigtCourtofAndhraPradesh in state of Andhra Pradesh, School Education Dept., Velagapudi, Guntur Dist. v. L.B.M' Iftishna4' allowed the writ petition WP No.24580 of 2l76.This Court is of the view that the discussion and ratio of the order in wP No.24580 of 2o16 is applicable to the facts of the case at hand. 3 (201tr)8 SCC 26s 4 2020 (2)ALT 381 (DB) .1:_-::- . 5 wp-7452 & 745r_2A15 arC wp 25531-2010 N8K, J B' In that vi.w ofthe mafte4 taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present writ petition, and keeping in ,riew the law laid down by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in M.L. Kesari [supra), and Amarkant Rai (supra) and the judgment of the Hon,bre Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra pradesh in L.B.M. Krishna (supra), these Writ Petitions deserve to be allowed.

9. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed by granting rhe relief prayed for by the petitioners. Respondent No.1 is directed to pass appropriate orders with regard to the request of the petitioners for regularization ol'their services as Lab Boys and also granting of notional increments, as per the judgment of Hon, ble Supreme Court in Umadevi (supra). Respondent No.1 shall also pass appropriate orders on the aspect of re-deployment of petitioners to any Department in case their post happened to have been surrendered to the Government. The entire exercise shall be completed a period of three (03J weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this orde4 and the same shall be <:ommunicated to the petitioners. Miscellaneous petitions, pending ifany, shall stand closed. _That Rule Nisi has been absol Witness the Hon'bte the Chief r uesday, the Seventh day of J ute as above. Justice ALOK ARADHE, on this anuary, Two Thousand and Twenty Five. SD/.T. TIRUMALA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAI{ //TRUE COPYII ( ..1 -l To 1 The Principal Secreta of Telangana at Hyde rabad. ry, for Higher Education sfcTloN oFFtcER Department, Secretariat, State 7 Hvderabad' of'Telangana at HYderabad' tnJitutionl tllitat<pet, Hyderabad'

2. The Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Departrnent' Secretariat' State 3. The commiss.roner/ oirecfii ot coltegiate Education, state of Telangana, *. Iil;"#il;ry & Conespondent' Mumtaz college (A Minoritv Aided " 5. The Principal; Mumtaz CJf"g?in Minority aided lnstitution) Malakpet' ^ +I1%""t3f; GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATIoN' Hish court for the State of , +*:E;:1"'L?rES'f;tfiftIRBIo*, ,LANNTNG, Hish court ror the State or " 8. One CC tO SRI SADU RAJE;WARA REDDY, AdVOCAIC TOPUC] ;. il; A i; fu; inerusHn goPPANA' Advo-cate (oPUC) ib.5n! & i;6Rl B.NALIN KUMAR' Advocate [oPUc] 11.Two CD CoPies Telangana at HYderabad' [OUT] SABs/ HIGH COURT DATED:07l01t2OZs \ \ COMMON ORDER WP.Nos.74S2 AND 1461 OF 2O1S AND 25531 ot 2016 1 STATE OA { sg JIN 2$25 \r) a ." * I D FS r'f ,a) ALLOWNG THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS. ,/ 5' 4.2 I y'./z<