SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(AP) 586

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao, J.
Ch Parvathi – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Writ Petition No.19038 of 2021
Decided On : 11-10-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: T Vijay Hanuman Singh

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 – Last Grade Service Rules, 1992 – Rule 7 – Last Grade Service Rules, 1964 – Seeking a relief to regularize her services – Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for relief – Held, Contention of respondents is hereby rejected as there is no sanctioned post – It is very unfortunate as petitioner is working since more than has not been considered by respondents and making her to run from pillar to post for regularization – It is the case to issue mandamus to respondent authorities to regularize services of petitioner – In view of Judgments adverted above and as per above discussion with regard to educational qualification the respondents shall consider case of petitioner for regularization of her services as per law – Respondents shall consider case of petitioner for regularization of her services either in post of office Subordinate or by creating a supernumerary post as Sweeper, subject to feasibility within a period of three months from date of receipt of a copy of this order – Writ petition disposed of.

ORDER :

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief/s:

    “…to call for the records from the respondents and issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and to direct the Respondents as under :

(i) To regularize her services of the writ petitioner with effect from 01.05.1991 under the provisions of Act No.2 of 1994 dated 15.01.1994 as amended by Act No.3 of 1998 dated 03.01.1998.

(ii) To pay the writ petitioner arrears of remuneration due to her for the work done in the post of Sweeper.

(iii) To appoint her in the cadre of Sweeper on permanent basis and not to the cadre of Office Subordinate by following the Roaster and according to her turn as S.C. Candidate under the provisions of Rule 7 of A.P. Last Grade Service Rules, 1992 with consequential benefits.

and pass such order or further orders…

2. As per the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, the Petitioner was appointed as Contingent worker in the Collector Office, Vizianagaram vide proceedings L. Dis.No.4570/86, dated 30.04.1986. The said orders came into force w.e.f. 01.05.1986. Since then she is discharging her duties in the cadre of Sweeper on permanent basis and later she has been appointed as Office Subordinate in the Office of Tahsildar, Gajapati Nagaram in Civil Supplies Department under the control of Deputy Civil Supplies Officer, Vizianagaram vide proceedings in RC No.1458/2016/BC, dated 06.11.2017.

3. While things stood thus, the petitioner has made a representation to regularize her as Office Subordinate. As no steps have been taken by the respondent authorities, the Writ Petitioner herein filed O.A. No.7464/2013 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal by an order dated 29.12.2016 has disposed of the said OA directing the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of her services in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance & Planning (FW.PC.III) Department, dated 22.04.1994 or G.O.(P) No.112, Finance & Planning (FW.PC.III) Department, dated 23.07.1997. While disposing the case, the Administrative Tribunal has relied on the Judgment in Ms. A. Manjula Bhashini and others v. Managing Director, A.P. Women’s Cooperative Finance Corporation Limited, (2009) 8 SCC 441.

4. Inspite of the order in the above said O.A., the petitioner herein also filed W.P. No.13555/2019, seeking a relief to regularize her services w.e.f. 01.05.1991 under the provisions of Act II of 1994 dated 15.01.1994 as amended by Act No.3 of 1998, dated 03.01.1998 and to pay the arrears of remuneration due to her for the work done as sweeper and to appoint the petitioner in the cadre of Sweeper on permanent basis and not in the cadre of Office Subordinate by following roaster and according to her turn as SC candidate under provisions of Rule 7 of Last Grade Service Rules, 1992 with all consequential benefits. The said Writ Petition was disposed without going into merits directing the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the writ petitioner and directed the authorities to pass appropriate orders within the stipulated time.

5. Basing on the said direction, issued by this Court in the above said W.P. No.13555 of 2019, the respondent authorities have passed impugned order dated 16.04.2021. Advertenting the post of Office Subordinate is governed by A.P. Last Grade Service Rules, 1992. As per Rule 5A of the said Rules, the qualification for appointment for the post of Office Subordinate is one must have passed 7th class examination. Smt. Parvati-petitioner, is not having requisite educational qualification to the post of Office Subordinate as per the conditions prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance & Planning Department, dated 22.04.1994. The case of the petitioner was rejected vide Memo No.REV01- LANAOCOUC(CCHC)/ 1236/2021-SER-II), dated 16.04.2021 and subsequently vide RC No.1730/2020/B3 dated 23.08.2021, the District Colle

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top