High Court · 2025

qMT._K. LAKSHMI, Wo Sri K.V. Subba Rao, Aged about 48 years, OccAttender, 'A/o fi-l-l+ig, O/o Cornmissioner, Endowments Dept., Eoggula-kunta, Hyderabad, Old Mallepally, Hyderabad. .....PETIT]ONER AND 1 2 State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Revenue (Endownrents) Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Telangana State, at Boggulakunta, Tilak Road, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewilh, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ. order or direction rnore particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDATVUS dectaring the orders daled 21-g-2017 in Mgmo. No.15636/Endts-l/201 7 passed by the respondent No.1 herein and consequential orders dated 14-9-2017 in Rc.No.A2l7O6112016 passed by the respondent No.2 rejecting to accommodate the petitioner as Attendar in the respondent No.2 office as illegal, arbitrary, uniust contrary to Art. 14, 1g aN 21 of Constitution of lndia and consequentially set-aside the same by regularizing/absorbing the services of the petitioner in lhe post of Attendar by granting time scale attached to the post with all back wages and consequential benefits. |.A.NO:1 OF 2017 (WPMP.NO:52326 OF 2017 ) Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High C(,urt may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to pay minimum time scale i:ttached to the post of aftendar held by the petitioner with alt usual allowance; on par with regular employees till date by applying the principle of equal pzy for equal work and continue the service of the petitioner as Attendar in the eslablishment of respondent No. by suspending the orders dated ',,.1-8-2017 in Memo. No.15636/Endts-112017 passed by the respondent No.1 herein and consequential orders dated 14-9-2017 in Rc.No.A2i706112016 passed by the respondent No.2; pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SRINIVASA MURTHY CHE EDELLA Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following ORDER \ L wP _42799 _2077 NBK, .l C THEEON'BT,F SRI JUSTIC E NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.42199 of 2017 ORDER: The case of thepetitioner is that she was appointed on 14'02'1990 as an Attender at the Production Centre located at Barkatpura, Hyderabad under the orders of Respondent No. 2 vide D.Di s.No. s3/PC/9 I I I / I 990, with a consolidated salary of Rs.600/- per month. The appointment was mad€ on a pennanent basis with a probation period of two years, and it was stated that upon completion of the first year, the petitioner would be eligible for regular pay scale. It is stated that she completed the probation period successfully and continued to work as an Attender. However, instead of being granted regular pay scale, the petitioner's salary was merely enhanced to Rs.900/- and subsequently to Rs.1500/- per month' No time scale was given, despite multiple representations. Several other individuals who were working in similar proj ects such as the Budhapumima Project were absorbed into regular posts within the Endowments Department under G.O.Ms.No.9ll, dated 05.11.1996, however, the petitioner was not considered for similar treatment. It is contended that after the Production centre was closed in the year 1999, th€ petitioner continued working in the office of Respondent No.2, discharging duties as an Attender without any break in service, and continued to receive Rs.l500/- per month as consolidated pay. The petitioner filed o.A. No.10542 of 2008 before the Hon'ble A.P. Administrative Tribunal, which was disposed of on2o.o3.2Ol2 with a direction to the respondents to make efforts to accommodate the petitioner in a Govemment organization on regular basis. Despite this, by Memo dated 21.08.2017, Respondent No. I directed that the petitioner could I I I I I I I I I i i I I I I ! i / 2 wp_42799 _2071 N8K, J f-l not be accommodated, claiming that the Production Cerrtre was a separate private industry and not a part of the Endowments Depa'tment- Relying on this, Respondent No.2 passed a consequential reje:tion order dated 14.09.2017;, hence, this writ petition.

2. Heard Mr. Srinivasa Murthy Cheedella, leame I counsel for the petitioner; and leamed Govemment Pleader for Endow nents. Perused the record.

3. At the outset, it is evident from the material rtn record that the petitioner has rendered continuous service from 14.02.1990 onwards, first at the Production Centre and thereafter in the office o[ Respondent No.2. The claim that the Production Centre was not part of ltre Department was not raised at the time of appointment. The petitioner hzr: put in 28 years of continuous service. Several similarly placed individr tals were granted regularization and time scale under G.O.Ms.No.9 I I . Dt: rial of such benefit to the petitioner is discriminatory and violative olArtic:t s 14,16,and2l of the Constitution of India.

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab r, 'lagiit Singhr has held that temporary employees performing similar duties as regular employees are entitled to wages at par with the minirnurr" of the pay scale of their counterparts. tn this case, the petitioneq though api ointed on a regular basis, was not paid in accordance with the pay scale ap rlicable to the post ofAttender. Therefore, the stand taken by the respondent s that the petitioner is a part-time worker and not entitled to regularization or pay scale is not sustainable either on facts or in law. 1(2017) 1 SCC 148 3 wp-47199-2077 NSK, J )

5. In that view of the matteq this Court is of the opinion that the impugned orders dated 21.08.2017 and 14.09.2017 are arbitrary illegal, and liable to be set aside.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, with a direction to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner as an Attender with effect from the date she completed one year of service i.e., 14.02. 1991, and extend the pay scale and all consequential benefits including arrears of salary, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Mscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- L. VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To //TRUE COPY// 6- SECTION OFFICER 1 . The Principal Secretary, Revenue (Endowments) Dept., Secretariat, State of 2. The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Telangana State, at Telangana at Hyderabad. Boggulakunta, Tilak Road, Hyderabad.

3. Two CCs to GP FOR ENDOWMENTS, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. {OUTI

4. One CC to SRI SRINIVASA MURTHY CHEEDELLA, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies SA GJP 9 / I HIGH COURT DATED:2010312025 l.,i r ( /..*' !t! {13 0 3 t[T \. ?. \n,.-\'': :: s: r t: - ORDER WP.No.42199 o12017 ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. ts+ q o\..