Driver v. 'l . The State of Telangana

As perC.C dated 01.02.2024vide tANo. 1t2024 in Wp(Ir) 16g1t2017. Cause Titlo is amended Petition t, r rler Article 226 Constitiution of lrrdia praying that in circumstancEs s : t-'d in the affidavit fired in support of ..he petitirn the High court may be pleas-'d tr direct the respondents to consider rhe .ase; of the appricants for regularizatro, :s per G.o.tvs.No.2'12, dt.22-04-1gg4 with aI consequentiar benefits w e f the crate of compretion of 5 years of service; ho ding the action of the respondents , not considering the cases of the appricants for regurarization as per G.o lvls.l'. 212, dt.22-o4-1994 though they furfiiled the conditions raid in above G.O. as il1:gal, improper, unIUSt, arbitrary and contrary tc law laid by Apex Court, and viclat r: of Articles 14,16 and 2.1 of Constitution ()f ln Jia Counsel for the F)etitioner: SRl. VENKATESHWARLU CiUMMAITAVELLy Counsel for the Flr:spondent Nos. 1to4: Gp FOR SERVICES I 9lyp^"Lf:. the Respondent Nos. 5&6: SRt RAMESH CHtLLA, ;TAND|NG COUNSEL The Court made the, following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITTON ITRINo.1691 of 2017 oRDER: The present Writ Petition is frled for the following relief: "Aggieued bA the oction of the respondents in not consideirq the cases of the appticants for regularization as per G'O Ms'No'212' dt 22-04-1994 euen though tLteg haue compteted 5 years of seruice as on cltt of date and fulftled all other conditions' in pursuonce oJ tl-te 4th respondent proposals nde Roc No Cl/4639/2011' ddted 28-3 2O11 is as illegal' arbitrary' ufl'just' contrary to Apex Court Judgment passed in A' Moniuta Boshini ond others in Ciuil Appeat No'3702/2OO6 ond batch' dated 6'7 2009' and uiolatiue of Artictes 14'16 and 21 of Constitutionoflndiaandseekingconsequential direction to the respondents to consider their cases reguLarization as per G O'Ms No'212' fo' dt'22 01 1gg4 ond Pass "'"

2. Heard Sri G' Venkateshwarlu' learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I for respondent Nos'1 to 4 and Sri Ramesh Chilla' learned Stalding counsel for respondent Nos'5 and 6' Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that all 3. applicants were initiallY aPPointed as NMRs w'e'f'29'04'1988 against the existing vacancies and all of them were complete d i l I I I 2 five years rrl service as on cutoff date i.e., 25.17..993 as per G.O.Ms N,: 2 2, dated, 22.O4.1994. The pet tioners along with similaril., r;i rr,rted persons approached the l{igtr Cr urt and as per direct ic,r- s. of the High Court, the Srh rqrspo,der rt extended the anr ual l;rade increments to the appltcalrts .,ide orders Proc.No. {:11"13/2OO1 , dated 3O.O4.2OO2 u,ith effe:t from the date ol ,:xtt: r Lrling minimum time scale, further the ir pay was revised fi-,trl 1i-" to time as per revisec pily ;cales and extendecr r I: : benefit of special grade post tmd spt cial adhoc promoticn p,)st, in automatic advancement schenre. 3(i) L,er.red counsei for the petitionerr; furthrrr submits that severai rirnilarly situated persons approachecl the Tribunal by filing o.,n s seeking direction to the responde.rts therein to consider the.r cases for regularization, ar-ld the Tri runal was pleased t.o cisltose ol the O.A. directing th: rt:spcndents to consider tlre <.irse of the applicants therein in ac,.:orcance with the provisir:r,s r:ontained in G.O.Ms.No.2l2, dated 2, .O4.Lgg4. In pursurrn:r. of directions of the Tribunal, the I ,r r()spondent issued o.rlrrrr; permitting the commissioner an,:r Director of Municipa,l Ac rnrnistration to regurarize the se .vices of applicants., rir:r-ern. Though the applicanrs iLre similarly situated, their cases were not considered by the respondents stating that the applicants did not approach the Tribunal' It is submitted that all the applicants are fully eligible ald qualihed forregtarizationoftheirservicesaSperG.o.Ms.No.212(F&P), dt.22-O4-Ig94 and their services were not regularized till today'

4. Learned counsel for respondent No'3 filed counter contending that the petitioners herein filed an Original Application No.1l97 /2014 before the then Administratrve Tribunal, and the Tribunal passed interim orders dated: lB.O2.2Ol4 and the petitioners herein' however' have not filed any d.ocument in the said O 'A', to prove the continuity of serwice and their eligibility in terms of G'O'Ms'212' dated:

22.04'lgg4.Itisfurthersubmittedthat,respondentNo.4once again vide Lr-No.498l2OO9/A3, dated: 12'06 '2012' directed the to submit acquittance register of a1l the to ascertain their eligibility in terms of respondent No.5 proposed NMR's G.O.Ms.No.2 12, dated:22'04'199 4' a(i) As per the conditions of G'O'Ms'No'212' dated 22.O4.1gg4, the individuals, to be eligible for consideration' shouldhaveworkedcontinuouslyforminimumperiodof5 4 years and or (ontinuing on 25.r r.1993, subjoct to ft rfirlment of the follos'rirrp, c ther 6 conditions: a) 'lhe l)::rsons appointed should possess t1 e q:alification pre:r:r'ibed as per rules in force as on the date from ',r.1riclt hts/her services have to be regularizec. b) 'lhe; r;hould be within the age limits iLs o:1 tho date of c) 'll-re rule of reservation wherever zLpplicat ie will be lirllor,',.d and back-log will be set r,ifl :tgai rst future t,ar:z: rt,ties. ir1;po rrtment as NMR/Daily wage emtrrloyr:e. d) Iipotr:cring of candidates from Emplo.vme nt I )xchalge is re lrr red. .posts e) l\bslr1>tion shall be against clear vacanci(]s rl c,on..ilered necessa{/ to be continued as per work load e xclrrJrng the vacancies already notiled io t re Andhra I)rzrcle s h Public Service Commission 7 Distric Selection Oom rt ittee. f) In t.'re case of Work charged Establislrme nt, where thert: ,till be no clear vacancies, ber:aur;e cf the fact tha t t he expenditure on Work_chat-gec is as fixed I'er:c{r.ttage of P.S. Charges and as so,)n :rs tlre rvork is or.er. the services of work charged estatrlist ment will hzt\.c tl lte terminated, they shalt t,e adjusr ed in the oth el rlepartments, District Oflices p.-ovi,ied there are cle;rr.,rcancies of Last Grade Service. 4(ii) Ir. i; further submitted that in o -der to consider regularizia tir r. of services of any individlral in terms of G.O.Ms.2 f 12, riated: 22.O4.1994, the persons appointerlon Daily wage/NMR c " )n consolidated payment, shorrrd har e rvorked continuousl'i ir:. minimum period of 5 years as o, 21 11.1993 and continL.re,C thereafter, subject to fulfillment o1.6 others conditioris as rr:ntioned above. The petitioners he:ein have not 5 hled any proof of the contimrity of their service or arry other relevant document to estabiish their continuity of work in terms of the G.O.Ms.No.2 1 2, d'ated' 24'04'1994' 4(iii) It is further submitted that' though the Municipal Commissionerhasstatedinhisproposalandsubsequent communications that the said individuals have been working as NMRs and have put in 5 years of service as on cutoff date as per G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 2204'1994' the same was not substantiated by acquittance with regard to payment of wages to establish the same and continuity of service. However, to give a fair opportunity to the Petitioners' this office vide memo d'ated22.06.2C)24hasdirectedtherespondentNo.S,Municipal CommissionertosubmittheproposalstotheCommittee constituted for scruttnY and recommendation of ProPosals under G.O.Rt.No.566, MA&UD Department' dated 11'O8'2O16' consists of Local authorities and better a decision considering the facts and AccordinglY, PraYed to dismiss the as the Committee equiPPed to take circumstances of the case' Writ Petition. respondent No.5 filed counter 5. Learned counsel for contending that the Petitioners were initiallY aPPointed AS 6 NMRs rv.r,:.1'. )9.O4.lgAg against the existin6J varan ries, and all of them cro rr rleted five years of service as on the cutoff date, i.e.,25. I1.', 1):)3, as per G.O.Ms. No.212 dated !12-C.i ,1994 the app'sin. 1r.ent orders and statement of . pa.ticr_ rars of the applicants annexed to the proposals ntaclr: I y the srh responclent, ,brwarded to the 4th respond,:nt rricl: Roc. No. cl 14639 tt 20 I 1, dated 2g-3-2or1 . The 5rr, resporde rt had time to time exre rcled the annual grade incrementr to the petitioners vide ord<:r's; .)r- rc.No.C/ lZ43/2OO1, dated 30 ,+-2OO2, *,irh effect from the cl:rt: of extending the minimum tiir_re sca e; further, their pa.,r w.as revised from time to time ar; p()r r:vised pay scales ancl 3..-tellded the benef-rt of special gra c1e posts and special .r,l h,): promotion posts in the automatic acl ,ancement scheme. 5(i) tt is futrther submitted that there zrre sorr o persons who approrrc:l-ed the Andhra pradesh Admin istrirtivt. Tribunal by filing rl).Ar; seeking direction to the respo,de,ts therein to consider tltt:ir. cases for regularization, the Tribunal u,iLs pleased to dispose, of r Ie O.A. directing the respondents tc, corrsider the case of the :,rptrrltcants therein in accorda,ce i.l,ith the |rovisions contained irr (l O.Ms.No.2l2, dated 22.04.1994. B.rt to the 7 fact, the petitioners herein have not approached any court of law or tribunal seeking regularization of their service, but as an afterthought hfter coming through the other emPloYees, the applicants approached the Tribunal and filed the Present application seeking regularization of their servlce' 5 (ii) It is further submitted that the 5th respondent is the subordinate to the respondent Nos' I to 4' and the 5th respondent's duty is to follow the orders and directions of the respondent Nos. I to 4 and to implement the same in due course of proced'ure' But the Sth respondent doesn't have any independent powers to take necessary steps without the direction or orders of the respondent Nos l to 4' Accordingly' prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition' Learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of 6. this Court, letter dated 25 '06 '2014 from the Commrssroner' Nalgonda Municipality, addressed to the Commissioner ald Director of Municipa'l Administration' Hyderabad' In the said letter, it is observed as follows: "It is further submitted tlut tLrc petitioners in O'A No 1197 of 2014 and O'A' No'2454 of 2014 are seeking onlg fonnal Order of regulorization' since the applicants u-tere alreadg getting all other benefits i'e'' time scale' increments etc'' ./ 8 u1:ept r ?:tulcrrizotion of their seruices, if the s<:ruict:s Lt1 the appLicorit.i ere regularized there is no ad ditionat -tintu cial btL;17.,::r r the Exchequer to the Gouernment. T\eA re ,itlly eligibt<, 1 ral[fied and entitled for regularizatiort The Hot ,ble A1t'zt (.r:r, rt uthile disposing Ciuil appeal No.3t02 oJ. 2,)0tt a|tl inttlL, cn 6tl, Julg 2OO9 directed tha.t th.e tloittl u, L.ge enr,,tlr.'t1,t,'; Ltnd other uLhose seruices hauc not b..etl req't [.rtrtz:.l so far, shall be entitlec] to be co l si(1,-re(l for reqil lu.rtz-jtiorl ttnd their seruices shall be regula,-izea sttbiect to Jill-tiltlr1,.nt of the conditions of G.O. dated. it2.OzL.l ,t e.1.,: 7 . Leetrnr:r counsel for the 5rh respondent rjupllort3d the said versio, c)f tl-(, le.rned counsel for the petitio,er and submitted that the Drol),)sal are pending with the Goverr.. me:tt.

8. In ,zit,:r,r r,f the submissions made by the learn )d counsel for respi::tivc r)a.rties, this Court, without going rnto the merits of the c:i:.sr:. d irect the respondent authorltics .r.here the proposals, arir rerding with them with regard to reg.rlarization of service s c,. .he petitioners, to pass an app)roprlat I order in accordarrre v' t h law, within a period of eight (O{l) ri eeks from the date c,l re...ipt. of a copy of this order.

9. With rh: ,rbove direction, this Writ petition rs dirposed of. There shall bt: rro order as to costs. 9 As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending' if any' rn this Writ Petition' sha1l stand closed' SD AltiSflNYt?A,EFRRX ,,TRUE COPY/' CTION OFFIGER To, IVlunictPal Admi nistration and Urban 500 020 partment, Secretariat' at, T.S ,HYd (PC erabad lll) De retary to 1. The Sec t Department, DeveloP men 2 The Se creta ry tb Government, Government, Secretart Finance rector of MuniciPal Administration ' ApPallate Com messione Council, Nalgo nda Muni T.S.,HYderabad missloner & Di The Com onal Commlss ioner cum 4 Thb Regi The Com missioner, M uniciPal E ecial Officer/Chairperson Municipal Council' District 6 The SP istrict Audit Officer' State Audit, Nalg onda., T FoR s ERV ICES I ES HWARLUGU MMAD AVE LLY, Ad Nalgond a District High Court forthe State of Telangana a vocate [OPUCI t T.S., HY , Hyd r cipati derabad. e(a ty, Nalgonda Nalgonda MuniciPalitY' RI. RAMESH CHILLA, SC [OPUCJ 7 ThE D 8. One CCto SR VENKA' I Two CCs toG Hyderaba eCCtoS 10 0n 11.Two CD CoPies P dlouTl BM BS HIGH COURT DATED:20 t06t2O25 o :tr 6ffi 0l I * (rtr . _-::::C :, S T4 /[ 7X?5 * Hrio - ) tl>. ) G f* ORDER WP(TR).No,1G91 ot 2011 DtspostNc OF THE WRIT pETtTtoN (TR) WITHOUT COSTS nI { I 1l l I I ;i I 1 I , I : ,