T- Satyanarayana Chary v. The State of Telangana

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 issue a Writ, Order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner with effect from the date of completion of '10 years of Part{ime services as on the cutoff date prescribed in G.O.Ms. No.112 dated 23.09.1997, as void, illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to consider the representation dated 14.11.2A2 r for regularization of the services of the petitioner with effect from the date of co.t pletion of 10 years of service from the date of his initial appointment for the purpr,: e of pension in terms of Law laid down by the Hbnble Supreme Court in the car:, of B.Srinivasulu Vs. Nellore Municipal Corporation and also the common orde. r r;sed by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in WP No.33936 of 20'1 1 and b: oh dated 02.05.2018 as conf irmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP IJ ,s;.1 3813/201 8 dated 23.07.2024 and further direct the respondents to fix ar: :ay the oensionary benefits the date of completion of 10 years of Part{im : :;ervices along with arrears lA NO: 1 OF 202s Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c r the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cor r direct the respondents to consider the representation c regularization of the services of the petitioner with eff : completion of 10 years of service from the date of his in,t e ) imstances stated in may be pleased to r ted 1 4. 1 1 .2025 tor I from the date of appointment for the purpose of pension in terms of Law laid down by the Hor t k: Supreme Court in the case of B Srinivasulu Vs. Nellore Municipal Corporation order passed by the Division Bench of this Honble Court in \ and batch dated 02.05.2018 as confirmed by the Honble ll rrd also the common /l) No.33936 of 201 1 preme Court in SLP Nos..13813/2018 daled 23.07 .2024 . Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondents No.l&3 : GP FOR SERVICEI; ll Counsel for the Respondents No.2,6&7: GP FOR SERVICt:: lll Counsel for Respondents No.4&5:SRl K.PRADEEP REDD'/ SC FOR GP,MP,ZP The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT TTYDERABAD THE HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK I[IRIT PETITION No.36441 of 2025 THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FTVE Between: T. Satyanarayana Chary AND The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and others ORDER: Petitioner Respondents The Writ Petition is fiied aggrieved by the action of the respondents 1n not regularizing the services of the petitioner AS arbitrary and illegal

2. Heard Sri S.Jagadish, iearned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services II for respondent Nos.1 and 3, learned Government Pleader for Services-Ill for respondent Nos.2 I 2 and 6 and Sri K.Pradeep Reddy, Iearned Star ling Counsel for respondent Nos.4 ancl 5. With their consent, t.i- c Writ Petition rs taken up lor disposal at the admission stage itself 3 . Today, rvhen the matter is taken up for h,: L:ing, the learned counsel for petitioner submits that the subject r Liltter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the orders passec by this Court in W.P.No.32519 ol 2025 dated 28.lO.2025 and reqrr :sted the Court to pass similar order in this writ petition aiso. The r a-id submission is not seriousiy disputed by the learned counsel rppearing for the respondents t+, ln view of the above and following th e order passed in W.P.No.32519 of 2025 dated 28.1O.2025 and in t:rms thereof, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to .l r: respondents to considcr thc representation of the petitioner dat,r I 74.11.2025 and pass appropriate orders, strictly in terms of Hc rr'ble Apex Court decision in B.Srinivasulu v. Nellore Municipal Corporation and othersl datecl 17.8.20 15 and the common or<1, r' passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.33936 r> 201 1 and batch dated 2.5.2018 as conhrmed by the Hon'ble i:preme Court in 'Civil nppeal N0.6318 of 2025 F.Y S.L.P.No.13B13 of 2018 and batch dated 23.7.2024, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight (B) weeks thereof from lhe date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate a copy of the same to the petitioner. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There sha1l be no order as to costs. SD/. K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To, //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

2. The Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

3. The Commissioner of Panchayat, State of Telangana, Himayath Nagar, Hyderabad.

4. The Chief Executive Officer, Yadadri Bhongir District. 5. The Mandal Parishad Devolopment Offlcer, Aler Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir District.

6. The Sub-Treaury Officer, State Audit, Aler, AIer lvlandal, Yadadri Bhongir District.

7. The Sub-Treaury Officer, State Audit, Aler, Aler Mandal, Yadadri Bhongir District.

8. One CC to SRI S.JAGADISH, Advocate. [OPUC] 9. Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES lll, High Court for the State of Telangana.

10.Two CCs to GP FOR SERVICES ll, High Court for the State of Telangana.

11.One CC to SRI K.PRADEEP REDDY, SC FOR ZPP,MP, GPP. [OPUC]

12. Two CD Copies. (Along with a copy of the Order, daled 28-10-2025 in W.P.No.32519 of 2025 to this Order) BSK BM R{- re& HIGH COURT DATED:0311212025 --:.'. ,'2"- '' ll3 n ' t a ? \.. +\\' '\ , f,r. - ^. _'j--- ,h ORDER WP.No.36441 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,,> ,f, THD HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTI{IK WRIT PETITION No.32519 OF 2025 ORDER: With the consent of the parties, this Writ Petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself

2. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliel '... i-s-sue a Wit, Order or dtrection more in the nature of Wit oJ Mandamus declaing the inaction of the respondenls irt snot regularizirtg the seruices of the petitioner wtth elfect from the dote of completion of lO gears of Part time seruices as on the cutoff date prescibed n G.O.Ms. No.112 dqted 23.07.1997, as uoid, illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to regulaize the seruices of the petitioner uth elfect Jrom the date of completion of 1O gears of seruice from the date of his initial appointment Jor the purpose of pension in terms of Inut laid dotun by the Honble Supreme Courl [n the case of B. Sintuasulu Vs. Nellore Muntcipal Corporation and qlso the common order passed bg the Diuision Bench of this Hon'ble Court in WP No.33936 of 2O1 1 and batch doted 02.O5.2O18 as confinned bg the Hon'ble Supreme CourT in SLP Nos.13813/2018 dated 23.07.2024 and batch and further direct the respondcnts to ftx and poA the pensonary benefits the date of completion of 10 gears of Patl-lime serutces along u.rith arrcqrs qnd Poss. -. "

3. Heard Sri S. Jagadish, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-Il appearing for respondent Nos.l to 4, Sri Pradeep Reddy Katta, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.5 and learned Government Pleader for Services III appearing for respondent No.6. 4, Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as Part-time Sweeper on 29.10.1979 in the 2 PK..I wp J.l5l!l 2(r2r Panthangi Gram Panchayat, Choutuppal Ivl r rCal and had completed 14 years of service as prescribed il 3.O.Ms.No.l12 dated 23.O7 .1997 . Therefore the petitioner ,r is eligible and qualifred for rcgularization of his services as per (l.O.Ms.lrlo.1l2 dated 23.O7.1997. llowever respondent No_ 1 issued G.O.Ms-No.382 dated 14.08.2OI3 regularizing the services of the petitioner along with Part time employees working r. various Gram Panchayats in Nalgonda District as per G.O.I/ ;.No.112 dated

23.O7.1997 in the sanclioned posts of Sweeper in . ,:rnthangi Gram Panchayat, Choutuppal Mandal, in pursuancc to the same, respondent No.4 issued regularization orders rn 04.09.2013 regularizing the sen'ices of the petitioner as Su,eeper. Subsequently, the petitioner retired from his serir.r on 31.O8.2023 while working as Office Sub-ordinate.

5. lt is further submttted that as per the decisi I I of the Hon,ble Supreme Cor-rrt of lndia in B. Sriniucsulu Vs. Nr I tore Municipal Corporation and. othersl, the NMR'S/Part-time , rnployees, who have completed 5/ I0 years of service are entitled tc - regularization of their services from the date of completion o ' :i/ 10 years of service as NMR/Part time employees and the s:r:r: decision was also reported in Division Bench of this Court in ',r . p.No.33936 of 2011 and batch dated 02.05.2018. Therefore, I arned counsel 1 Civil Appeal No 63 18 of 2025 3 I'K..J Wp 32519 2O2s seeks permission of this Court to make a representation to the respondents seeking retrospective regularization in terms of orders passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in B' Sriniuq.sulu Vs- Nellore Municipal Corporation and others dated 17.08.2015 and the common order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.33936 of 20l I and batch dated O2.05.2O18 as confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. i3813 of 2O 18 and batch dated 23.07 .2024 and further prays this Court to direct the respondents to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders, within a stipulated period of tlme.

6. Learned Government Pleader for Services - II and III appearing for the respondent Nos'l to 4 ar:d 6 submits that, on receipt of a copy of the representation, the respondents will consider the same and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. 7 . Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to submit a representation in order to redress the his grievance within a period of ten (lO) days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and on receipt of such representation, the respondents are directed to consider the same and pass 4 PK,J U't) .125 l(l 2025 appropriate orders, strictly in terms of Hon'ble Ape.< Oourt decision in B. Sriniucsulu Vs. Nellore Municipal Cor toro.tion and others dated 1 7.08.20 i 5 and the common order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.33936 o{ 2 )11 and batch dated 02.05.2O18 as confirmed bv the Hon'ble Sr 1 reme Court in SLP No. 138 13 of 20 l8 and batch dated '.1 \ 07 .2024, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a peric 1 of eight (08) weeks thereof from the clate of receipt of a copy o this order and communicate a copy of the same to the petitioner. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shz,1 stand closed. There shall bc no order as to costs. Date: 28.1O.2025 SRK PULLA (ARTHIK, J