JUDGMENT :

C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J.

1. Heard Sri Y.Nagi Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for APSPDCL and Sri M.Pitchaiah, learned counsel for the respondents-writ petitioners.

2. Aggrieved by the order, dated 19.03.2020, in W.P.No.44691 of 2017, the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited (for short, ‘APSPDCL’) filed the present appeal.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to as arrayed in Writ Petition.

4. A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ of Mandamus declaring the order Lr.No.SE/O/VIA/PO/Adm/JAO.I/U2/D.No.331/2016, dated 05.02.2016, issued by the 3rd respondent i.e., Superintendent Engineer, APSPDCL, Vijayawada, rejecting absorption of the services, as arbitrary, illegal, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to absorb the petitioners into regular services of the respondent-corporation in any suitable post from the date of eligibility with all consequential benefits.

5. The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition show that the first petitioner worked as a contract labour from 01.09.1996 to 31.12.1997 in erection and dismantling of LTHT lines, including stringing of lines, digging pits, poles and erecting of transformer structures at various places in Penamaluru of Patamata Sub-Division, Vijayawada, while the 2nd petitioner worked as contract labour from 01.02.1996 to 31.03.1998 along with the 1st petitioner. Both of them worked under the contractor, by name, M.Sambasiva Rao during the above period. It is averred that service certificates to that effect were also issued and their work was supervised and controlled by the respondents. On 18.05.1997, the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board framed a scheme for absorption of casual labours into certain regular posts. As per the scheme, the contract labours have to be considered for selection and appointment against 50% existing vacancies and seniority shall be reckoned based on services rendered by the candidates in the units as per the muster roles or wage register maintained under Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act. Pursuant thereto, the 1st respondent in the writ petition i.e., APSPDCL issued a notification on 25.05.2001 inviting applications from contract labours for filling up left over vacancies from contract labours who are in service as on 18.05.1997. The petitioners, along with others, applied for selection and being unsuccessful, challenged the action of the respondents in Writ Petition No.22713 of 2004, which was allowed directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners.

6. Aggrieved by the same, APSPDCL (respondent in the writ petition) filed Writ Appeal No.260 of 2010. By an order, dated 31.03.2015, the Writ Appeal was disposed of, directing the respondents to verify service particulars with greater clarity, etc. The inaction on the part of the respondents lead to filing of the contempt case, which was dismissed on 01.09.2017. After disposal of the contempt case, the 3rd respondent in the writ petition, who is Superintendent Engineer, APSPDCL, Vijayawada, issued the impugned proceedings, dated 05.02.2016, rejecting the claim of the petitioners for absorption.

7. Challenging the same, Writ Petition No.44691 of 2017 was filed, which was allowed on 19.03.2020, directing the respondents to absorb the petitioners, in any suitable post, with effect from March, 2016 along with all consequential benefits from that day. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed by the Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company Limited.

8. Sri Y.Nagi Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants, would submit that writ petitioners submitted only statement of work done by the contractor, but the service certificate filed by them does not refer to the agreement number