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

2026 Supreme(AP) 270

2026 APHC 32651
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO, J.
K. Venkateswarlu, S/o. Koteswar Rao - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Its Pri. Secretary, Panchayat Raj Department - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 26776 of 2021
Decided On : 11-08-2026
Advocates Appeared :
For the Petitioner : T D Pani Kumar, B. Bhaskara Reddy.
For the Respondent : GP For Services I.

ORDER :

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

"….to issue Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by calling for the records relating to Memo No.1024845/Estt.III/2019, dt.27.08.2021 issued by the 1st respondent and set aside the same by declaring as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also contrary to the proposals of the 5th respondent sent vide Proc.Roc.No.3319/94-G7, dt.7.10.2004, Roc.No.3310/1994/G3, dt.27.3.2015 and Roc.No.3319/1994/G10, dt.20.1.2020 and 3.6.2020 which were sent to 1st respondent through proper channel and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners from the date of completion of 5 years in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, F&P dt.22.4.1994 as it was done in the case of other workers vide G.O.Rt.No.553, PR & RD Deptt., dt.30.3.2005 with all other attendant benefits and pass such other orders……."

2. The Writ Petition is filed to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, asserts that the petitioners were initially appointed as Junior Assistant-cum-Bill Collectors and Bill Collectors on a daily wage basis in various Gram Panchayats in Guntur District, starting from the year 1987-1988. It is stated that the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.212, F&P, dated 22.04.1994, which provides for the regularization of daily wage/temporary/consolidated pay workers under certain conditions. According to this G.O., individuals must have completed five years of service by 25.11.1993 and there must be existing vacancies for the regularization of daily wage employees. The 5th respondent has submitted proposals to higher authorities through Proceedings in Roc.No.3319/94-G7, dated 07.10.2004, for the regularization of 97 full-time contingent/NMRs/Daily Wages/Fixed Pay/consolidated pay employees working in various Gram Panchayats in Guntur District, in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994. Out of 97 candidates, the Government issued G.O.Rt.No.553, PR & RD Department, dated 30.03.2005, to regularize 60 individuals. Subsequently, 12 Bill Collectors and 9 Junior Assistants-cum-Bill Collectors have emerged in Guntur District due to promotions to Panchayat Secretaries and certain Bill Collectors posts have arisen due to promotion as Junior Assistants in the Gram Panchayat. The 5th respondent sent proposals for regularization of 20 candidates to the 1st respondent through proceedings dated 27.10.2015, and there remains 20 vacancies due to promotions, and says that they are eligible and qualified for regularization under G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994.

3. The petitioners further state that, according to the Supreme Court judgment in A. Manjula Bhashini and others Vs. Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Women’s Co-operative Finance Corporation Limited and another, reported in (2009) 8 SCC 431, the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994 were upheld, directing the completion of the regularization process for eligible employees. The petitioners submit that the respondents have not taken steps for their regularization under this G.O., despite proposals being sent on 27.10.2015. As a result, the petitioners filed W.P.No.12333 of 2019 seeking regularization of their services according to G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994. This Court directed the authorities to consider the proposals from 27.10.2015 and issue appropriate orders. Non-compliance with the Court orders, the petitioners filed C.C.No.960 of 2021. Later, the respondents rejected the petitioners' request for regularization through impugned Memo dated 27.08.2021, indicating that the petitioners had not completed 10 years of service by 25.11.1993, as per G.O.Ms.No.112, F&P dated 23.07.1997. The petitioners have challenged this memo in the present writ petition, on the ground that the referenced G.O. does not apply to them, since they

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