Back
VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
P. D. Suryanarayana Reddy – Appellant
Versus
Andhra Pradesh Industrial infrastructure Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim for regularization of services based on tenure. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. respondent's defense against regularization. (Para 5 , 8) |
| 3. claim based on compassionate appointment and mandatory corrections. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. criteria for regularization under legal precedent. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. legal interpretation of regularization criteria. (Para 11) |
| 6. writ petitions allowed for regularization. (Para 13) |
ORDER :
Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda, J.
Since the issue to be resolved in these two writ petitions is same, I deem it appropriate to dispose of them by this common order.
2. Heard Ms. K. Manasa, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.12308 of 2021, Sri P. Raghavender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.26947 of 2021, Sri J. Ugranarasimha, learned standing counsel for the respondents in W.P.No.12308 of 2021, and learned Government Pleader for Services appearing for the official respondents in W.P.No.26947 of 2021. Perused the record.
Pleadings in W.P.No.12308 of 2021
3. This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in not regularising the services of the petitioner as NMR either in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994 or in view of his cont
The court established that long-term service and existing vacancies can warrant regularization, even if initial appointments were irregular, provided the employees meet certain criteria.
Completion of ten years of service gives a right to regularization, which cannot be negated by subsequent policy changes unless misconduct is proven.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
