The court directed the administrative authorities to consider a representation for regularization of services based on continuous employment, strictly adhering to the law and principles established by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring impugned action of the respondents particularly on part of the 2nd respondent in not considering the claim of the petitioner for regularization of his services as being arbitrary, illegal, unjust discriminative and violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India besides being Contrary to the law laid down by the Honble Apex Court in the cases between the secretary. State of Karnataka and Others Versus Umadevi(3) and Others (2006 (4) SCC 1), Nihal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others (2013 (14) SCC 65, Amarendra Kumar Mahapatra and Others Vs State of Orissa and Others (2014 (4) SCC 583, Amarkant Rai Vs State of Bihar (2015 (8) SCC 265 and Narendra Kumar Tiwari and Others Vs State of Jharkhand and Others (2018 (8) SCC 238 and consequently hold that the petitioners entitled to be regularize his services with all consequential benefits and to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to forthwith extend the benefit of minimum time scale of pay attached to the post of attender consider the claim of the petitioner for regularization of his services and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant leave to the Respondent No.2 in the Writ Petition No.2513 of 2024 to file counter affidavit in the above Writ Petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. A PHANI BHUSHAN

Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. KANDA SRINIVASU SC FOR ENDOWMENTS (KS AND WG)
2. GP FOR SERVICES II

The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI
WRIT PETITION NO: 2513/2024

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner, despite the petitioner having been working under their control for more than 19 years.

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks disposal of the Writ Petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to respondent Nos.1 and 2, along with all relevant material, to establish that he has been in continuous service from the date of his initial appointment.

Upon receipt of such representation, respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall consider the case of the petitioner for regularization, strictly in accordance with law and the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, and pass appropriate orders, after due consideration, within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of the representation along with a copy of this order.

With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Interim orders, if any, granted earlier shall stand vacated. Consequently, all pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.