ORDER:

1. Heard Sri P.V.Krishnaiah, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri D.Ravishankar Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner filed this writ petition to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not granting age relaxation of contract employees, who have completed their tenure by June, 2011 and not considering them for the posts reserved for SC/ST as per the Notification No. ECIL PG(r) 2012, dated 20.12.2021, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to receive the petitioners’ applications for the post of Fitter and Turner as per the Notification ECIL PG (r) 2012, dated 2012.01.21 by relaxing the petitioners’ age as they are contract employees and permit them to participate in the recruitments processes by appearing for the written test and interview.

3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is as follows:

(a) The petitioners passed ITI O trade as fitter and welder respectively and they registered their names in the employment exchange Ranga Reddy District and they belong to SC community.

(b) In the year September, 2007, the respondents issued notification for filling the vacancies of fitter and welder post on contract employment on tenure basis. The employment exchange sponsored the names of the petitioners along with others.

(c) Being the successful candidates, the petitioners were offered employment in their respective trades on contract basis for a period of three years i.e. from 13.09.2007 to 13.09.2010 and extended their tenure till 30.06.2011.

(d) The petitioners along with other similarly placed have filed writ petition for regularization of services on the ground that there are permanent vacancies, but the respondents started engaging new set of contract of labour through recruiting agency. The petitioners requested the respondents to follow the procedure as per principles of 24 II of the Industrial Disputes Act, but the said request was rejected and issued notification dated 21.02.2012 for recruitment of permanent posts of Fitters-2, Welders-2, and turner-1.

(e) The petitioners name was not sponsored by the employment exchange as their names were removed from the employment exchange and that 30 years age was prescribed for sponsoring the candidates.

(f) The respondents permitted the internal candidate, who is age barred, by relaxing their age. In fact no age was mentioned and those posts are reserved for SC/ST candidates.

(g) It is settled principle of law that once a candidate is engaged in public employment with in the age prescribed as casual or contract employee or temporary in the respondent company i.e. with in the prescribed limit of age and worked in the status of casual or temporary contract basis such candidates age has to be relaxed for the purpose of providing permanent employment. The petitioners case also placed on similar facts and circumstances and hence, their applications are genuine and reasonable one. Hence, this writ petition is filed.

4. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents is as follows:

(a) The applicants through their Trade Union namely ECIL Staff & Workers Union, moved Conciliation machinery available under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), ATI Campus, Vidyanagar, Hyderabad vide Union’s representation dated 20.06.2011. The said authority convened a meeting on 21.06.2011 vide notice dated 20.06.2011 and after due deliberations adjourned to 27.06.2011, 18.07.2011 and 07.02.2012 and subsequently, the matter was concluded without any decision on the parties, on 17.02.2012, as per the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The petitioners invoked the conciliation machinery, suppressing the said fact, raised various misleading contentions. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled to agitate on the very same issue p