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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 32618

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK
Vemula Ganapathi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 38392/2025



##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

WRIT PETITION No.38392 OF 2025

Dated 22nd DECEMBER, 2025

Between:

Vemula Ganapathi.

…Petitioner

AND

The State of Telangana,

Rep. by its Principal Secretary,

Schedule Caste Development Department,

T.S. Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and 4 others.

… Respondents

O R D E R :

With the consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is

taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“…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 regularizing the petitioner services

retrospectively on completion of five years of service in terms of

G.O.Ms.No.212 Finance and planning FW PC III Department

dated 22-4-1994 is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional apart

from violation of principles of Natural Justice and consequently

direct the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for

regularization of his services retrospectively on completion of

five years of continuous service in the department w.e.f. 1-3-

1988 for the purpose of pension and pensionery benefits by

following the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case

##PAGE2##

2

of B.Srinivasulu Vs. Nellore Municipal Corporation in Civil

Appeal No.6318 of 2015 dated 17-8-2015 and the Judgment of

this Hon’ble Court in WP No.33936 of 2011 and batch dated

2-5-2018 with all consequential benefits and pass…”

3. Heard Sri A.Malhar Rao, learned counsel for the

petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-III

appearing for the respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner was initially appointed as a daily wage worker on

01.03.1983 and his services were subsequently regularized

vide proceedings dated 20.01.2010 as a Class-IV employee in

the last grade service in the post of Cook. Consequently, after

rendering 42 years of service, the petitioner retired from

service on 30.06.2025 upon attaining the age of

superannuation. It is further submitted that in similar

circumstances, the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at

Hyderabad, vide order dated 02.05.2018 in W.P.Nos.33936 of

2011 and batch, has directed the authorities concerned to

extend the benefit of the judgment in B.Srinivasulu &

others v. The Nellore Municipal Corporation represented

by its Commissioner, Nellore District, Andhra Pradesh

and Others (delivered in Civil Appeal No. 6318 of 2015, dated

##PAGE3##

3

17.08.2015) to the petitioners therein by reckoning their

services from the date of completion of five years, on or before

25.11.1993 for the purposes of their pension and pensionary

benefits. However, in the present case, the services of the

petitioner were not regularized. As such, learned counsel

prays this Court to permit the petitioner to submit a

representation to the respondents for redressal of his

grievance and to direct the respondents to consider the same

and pass appropriate orders in the light of the judgment of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.Srinivasulu (supra) and the

order dated 02.05.2018 in W.P.Nos.33936 of 2011 and batch,

within a time-frame to be stipulated by this Court.

5. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the

respondents submits that on receipt of representation from

the petitioner, the respondents will consider the same and

pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law.

6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned

counsel for the respective parties, this Writ Petition is

disposed of, permitting the petitioner to submit a

representation for redressal of his grievance within a period of

##PAGE4##

4

one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Upon receipt of such a representation, the respondents are

directed to consider the same, in the light of the judgment of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.Srinivasulu (supra) and the

order dated 02.05.2018 in W.P.Nos.33936 of 2011 and batch,

and pass appr

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