High Court · 2025

of her services into last grade service as Office Subordinate in existing vacancy by considering the proposals submitted by the 4th respondent in Lr..No.A2l1 1812014, daled 02 11.?017 withou-t reference to the Memg No.109/T(S and V)12015-5, dated 10 09.2015 issued by the 1qt respondent anfl conqgquential qrderq in Memo.No 3281C212Q1 , dated 1 1.09.2915 issued by the 2nd respon(ent and the orders issued in Memo.No.Azl118t?Q14, d4ted 14.09.20'15, issued by the grd respondent fq(hwith Counsgl for the Petitionqq; SRI RAyINDEB ALKUoHI Counsel for Bespondents; cF FOB SERVI$ES The Cqurt q-qCe thF follswing: ORPER 1, wp_4OA59 2014 THE HON'BLE SRI IUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETIT ON No. 859 of2 018 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as a Part-time Sweeper in the office of 3'd respondent-Deputy Transport Commissione[ Karimnagar District on 23.08.1983. It is her case that she is entitled to regularization as per G.O.(P) No.112 dated 23.07.1997 as she tulfilled the condition of completing ten years of service as of 25.11.1993. She made a representation seeking regularization in the Last Grade Service as office Subordinate, howeveq as no action was taken, she approached the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A.No.72B0 of 2014' The Tribunal, by order dated27.L2.2014 directed as follows: "ln view of the above facts and circumstances, the respondenb are directed to consider the case of the applicant for regularization as per G.O.Ms.No.11 2, Finance and Planning (FW.PC-lll) Department, dated 23.07.1997. The respondents are also directed to pay monthly remuneration to the applicant from May, 2013, il the applicant has rendered work as Part- time sweeper. Necessary orders in this regard shall be passed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." Pursuant to the order dated27.t2-2014 passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.7280 of 2014, the respondent authorities, after a series of correspondence about the request of the petitioner for regularization, ultimately rejected her case stating that she has to fulfill all the conditions stipulated in the G.O.[PJ No'112, and that she did not tulfil the condition relating to "absorption shall be against clear vacancies or 2 wp 40859,2018 NS( l posf" since there is no sanctioned strength of the post rrf Sweeper in the Office of the 3.d respondent-DTC, Karimnagar. Hence, this writ petition.

2. Heard Mr. A. Ravindec learned counsel for the petitioner; and the learned Government Pleader for Services appearing for respondent- Transport Department. Perused the record. Learned counsel for the petitione4, while makinl; submissions on

3. the lines of writ affidavit, essentially submits that the petitioner has been rendering services as Part-Time Sweeper since 1983 and she is eligible for regularization as per G.O.(P) No.112, but her case has been rejected in spite olthe letter issued by 4tr respondent-Dteputy Transport Commissioner recommending her case to the Government for regularization in the vacancy of Office Subordinate. l-earned counsel submits that it is almost four decades that she has treen serving the respondent Department in part-time capacity and rejer:ting her case for regularization is bad in law. Learned Government Pleader for Services justifies the impugned

4. action. Relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme L'ourt in Union of India v. Ilmo Devil, learned Government Pleader contends that the petitioner cannot seek regularization as there is no sanctioned post for regularizing her services.

5. At the outset, it is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as a part-time sweeper in the Office of the 3.a respondent-Deputy Transport Commissioner on 23.08.1983. It may be noted that the G.O.[PJ.No.112 dated 23.07.1997 was issued for regul:rrization of part r (2021) 20 SCC 290 7 3 wP_40459-ZO1a NB( ' time employees who rendered ten years of service and continuing as on 25.llJ-|gg3.Considering the date of appointment of the petitione4 she undoubtedly fulfilled the condition stipulated in the G'O(PJ No'112 relating to completion of ten years of service and continuing as on 25J^L.1gg3.lt can further be seen from the record that the petitioner vide representation dated 16'10'2017 requested the 4tt'respondent- District Transport Officer requesting regularization of her seryices' wherein it is stated that she was appointed as Part-time Sweeper on 23.08.1983 and she has been working to the satisfaction of higher authorities without breaks, and though she is a part-time employee, she performed duty for complete hours in the office'

6. ThereafteL the 4s respondent-District Transport Officer has submiffed proposals vide letter dat ed 02'17'2077 to the 2nd respondent- Transport Commissione[ stating that she fulfilled the conditions stipulated in the G.0.[PJ No.112, and that she may be regularized in the vacancy of Office Subordinate as per the Check Slip enclosed' and also requested the 2nd respondent to recommend the case ofthe petitioner totheGovernment'Therelevantportionoftheletterdatedo2,t|.20L7 reads as followsi "ln this connection, l resubmit herewith the proposals for regularization of Smt'M' Laxmi for the post of Office Subordinate duly filled in the check slip as prescribed in Government U.O'Note No"13622t2111A1/PC'llU06 dated 0T.06.2006asshehasfulfilledalltheconditionsstipulatedin G.O.Ms.No.l'12, (FW'PC'lll) Department dated 23'07'1997 and no other senior penion is left over for regularization' 4 '1 wp_40859 2018 NAX,I ( Therefore, I request the Transport Commissioner, Telangana State, Hyderabad, to kindly recommend the case of Smt. M. Laxmi, Part Time Sweeper of this office to the Government for regularization in the clear vacancy of Office Subordinate as per the check slip enclosed herewith for ready reference as requested by her."

7. .. Furtheri the Check List enclosed with the Letter rlated 02.71.2017 issued by the 4rh respondent-District Transport Officer [placed at material page No.22 of the writ petition) would show that the petitioner passed Seventh standard, and was aged about 19 years by the date of appointment as part-time sweepe4 and therefore it cannot be said that she is not qualified for the post. Furthe[ the Check List would show that her services were recommended for continuation as perr G.O.Ms.No.445, Finance (SMPC) I)epartment, dated 26.11.2008. It is pertincnt to note that when the petitioner lvas appointed as

8. part-time Sweeper on 23.08.1983 and has been rendering services ever since, for almost four decades, it goes without saying that the services of sweeper are invariably required and were utilized on a daily basis in the office of 3.d respondent-DTC. It is beyond comprehension of this Court, the authorigr under which the respondent is permitted to eternally continue a person in a part-time/temporaLry capacity, for decades, and thereafter take a plea of no clear vacancjr. In that view of the malte4 the impugned action rejecting the case of the petitioner for regularization is illegal and, hence, liable to be set asi<[e.

9. Having considered the respective submissions, and perused the record, this Court fjnds force in the prayer ofthe petitioner; and this is a 7 5 wp 40859 2018 NBK,I fit case to exercise discretion under extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under ArLtcle 226 of the Constitution.

10. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 10.09.2015 issued by the 1st respondent, and also the consequential orders i.e., order dated 11.09.2075 issued by the 2na respondent, and the order dated 74.09.20L5 issued by the 3'd respondent are set aside; and the writ petition is allowed. No costs. The 1" respondent shall pass appropriate orders regularizing the services of petitioner with effect from the appropriate date as per G.O.(P) No.112, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this order is prospective, and the petitioner shall not claim any retrospective monetary benefits on account of this order. She is, however; eligible for all notional benefits from the date of regularization. Miscellaneous petitions pending, ifany, shall stand closed. That Rule Nisi has been made absolute as-above' niiin""" ttr" non'ureirre ldrrruc cHIEF J-LlsrlcE suJoY PAUL' qn thi r.i uav, ii'e iiventv iil,th dlt oi .t, n ua ry, t*" tT#e:Bi31IHitTI'[Ero" DEPUTY REGISTRAR / //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, \ -ci t'etansaria, secrelariat Buildings' Hyderabad'

1. The Prlncipal Secretary, Transport, Roads.and Buildings.(T.r'Sqr' and Vig) ' oil-ri,iiii6it, slitL z it'Siri"lioi co-m-iirission6r, siate of Telangana, Hyderabad' : iil; oEilli1iansport -commissioner, i. it? [Et#Jjffiffi ["? [ffi.[iimg:i; i8fl l[i: " Ka, m n as a r D i stri ct 6. i;; dd"i;Gi F;i S"*i..il tj,gli Court rbr the State of relangana' [oUr] 7. Two CP CoPies Karimnagar District' MBC BS HIGH COURT DATED: 2410112025 ."..-. .,.G r- -,: \ O ! APH 2t25 '1.\ j, / ') "/.t{ o. \i l: F',/r f.:.il €!'r * ORDER WP.No.4080Q of 2010 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS