Back
HARINATH NUNEPALLY
T. Baba Fakruddin – Appellant
Versus
Government of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. grievance regarding regularization of services. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. government's reasoning against regularization. (Para 5) |
| 3. court's observations on engagement and eligibility. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. writ petition allowed; orders for regularization. (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT /ORDER :
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader attached to the office of the Additional Advocate General appearing for the first respondent.
2. The grievance of the petitioners is that they have been engaged during the years 1991-2005 at Sri Venkateswara University P.G. Center, Kadapa, on temporary basis. After the establishment of Yogi Vemana University, Kadapa, the teaching and non-teaching staff who were working in the S.V. University, P.G. Centre, Kadapa, were transferred to the second respondent, Yogi Vemana University. Later, the petitioners sought regularization of their services. The Vice-Chancellor of the second respondent, Yogi Vemana University, issued proceedings dated 12.10.2012, regularizing the services of the petitioners, as they were stated to be working in the existing posts and also in the sanctioned va
Long-term temporary employees, transferred to a new university, have a valid claim for regularization due to lack of illegal engagement and existing vacancies.
Since the similarly situated persons have already been extended the benefit of regularization, the University should have taken up the cases of the respondents petitioners on its own and as a model e....
Prolonged service in essential roles transforms temporary positions into regular ones, necessitating regularization, despite initial stipulations against it.
Regularization – While directing for regularisation in service Court must strike a balance between all parties.
The court affirms the legal right of continuous employees to seek regularization and directs timely consideration of their representations based on established judicial precedents.
Since there are no sanctioned posts on which any of these petitioners were appointed as irregular appointments, no such directions are warranted.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of employees to regularization and absorption in sanctioned posts after working for more than ten years without the benefit or prot....
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.
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
