JUDGMENT

M S Ramachandra Rao, J. - This Writ Petition raises issues as to legality of :

(i) action of the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) adopting "outsourcing of employees" as a method of engaging services of the petitioners as Sanitary Supervisors (SFA), Sanitation Workers, Entomology Field Workers, Entomology Superior Field Workers, Supervisors (EFA), Superior Field Assistants on Fixed Wages,

(ii) claim of petitioners for regularization of their services in the GHMC in the said posts in the GHMC, and

(iii) action of GHMC in denying them minimum of time scale of pay attached to each of the posts while utilizing the services of the petitioners in the said capacities through outsourcing Agencies.

2. There is no dispute that all the petitioners are engaged by GHMC on outsourcing basis since 2008, 2010 and 2011 and their wages were being paid through various outsourcing agencies.

3. The petitioners have arrayed in this Writ Petition, the State of Telangana represented by Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration as the 1st respondent, and the GHMC as 2nd respondent.

The contentions of the petitioners

4. It is the contention of the Writ petitioners that they have been engaged in the various posts mentioned above for the last 2 decades; that there was a notification issued by the GHMC in Eenadu Telugu Daily Newspaper that it wanted full time employees through Contractor, that the petitioners attended the interview and joined in GHMC.

5. They allege that though they have completed more than 10 years of unblemished service, their services have not been regularized and the GHMC has violated the judgments of the Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi, (2006) 4 SCC 1 ONGC Vs. Petroleum Coal Labour Union, (2015) 6 SCC 494 and Order dt.05-01-2018 in W.A.No.285 of 2017 and batch; that all the petitioners are skilled workers and they cannot be said to have been appointed irregularly or illegally; the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' restated in State of Punjab Vs. Jagjit Singh, (2017) 1 SCC 148 is being violated by the GHMC; that the GHMC's action amounts to forcing the petitioners to work as 'bonded labour' and their fundamental rights guaranteed by Articles 14, 16, 19, 21 and 23 of the Constitution of India are being violated.

6. They also state that they have given representations to the GHMC on 29-12-2009, 05-09-2018 and 10-09-2018 seeking regularization of their services in the GHMC and also seeking application of the principle 'equal pay for equal work'.

7. They also filed I.A.No.1 of 2018 to pay them minimum pay scale attached to the said posts in which they are working.

The interim order passed by this Court in IA.No.1 of 2018

8. On 31-12-2018, this Court passed the following order:

" ... Having regard to the decision of the Supreme Court in the State of Punjab & Others Vs. Jagjit Singh and others, (2017) 1 SCC 148 , the 2nd respondent shall pay petitioners wages on par with the minimum of time scale to the persons discharging similar duties in the 2nd respondent Corporation"

9. On 31-12-2018 itself, the Writ Petition had been admitted and notice had also been taken by the learned Government Pleader for General Administration on behalf of the 1st respondent and Sri L.Dayakar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel had taken for the 2nd respondent.

The vacate stay application filed by the GHMC

10. The 1st respondent has not chosen to file counter-affidavit in the matter though more than one and half years have elapsed.

11. The GHMC has filed a counter-affidavit and also I.A.No.1 of 2019 to vacate the interim order granted on 31-12-2018 in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in W.P.No.47675 of 2018.

THE STAND OF THE GHMC

12. It is the case of the GHMC that all the petitioners are outsourcing workers of GHMC duly engaged through outsourcing agencies but not by GHMC directly.

13. According to the GHMC, it outsources certain services to private agencies who in turn provide manpower for support services and it is the o