I N THE HI GH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WRI T PETI TI ON No.3945 OF 2023 Between:

G.Venkanna … Petitioner And The State of Telangana & Others … Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 06.08.2025 THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers : Yes may be allowed to see the Judgment?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be : Yes marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to : Yes.

see the fair copy of the Judgment?

_____________________________

MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA I N THE HI GH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WRI T PETI TI ON No.3945 OF 2023 % 06.08.2025 Between:

# G.Venkanna … Petitioner And $ The State of Telangana & Others … Respondents Gist:

> Head Note:

! Counsel for the Petitioner : Ch.Ganesh ^ Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5: AGP for Services-I ^ Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 & 6: Sri Pradeep Reddy Katta, learned standing counsel ? Cases Referred:

i)(2020) 1 SCC (L&S)

(ii) 1990(2) SCC Page 396 (iii) 2025 I NSC 144 (iv) 2024 LawSuit(SC) 1209 (v) (2017) 1 SCC 148 (vi) 2010(9) SCC 247 (vii) (2013) 14SCC 65 (viii) 2015 SCC Online SC 1797 (ix) (2015) 8 SCC 265 (x) (2014) 7 SCC 223 (xi) SLP No.32847 of 2024 (xii) AI R 2020 Supreme Court 3969 (xiii) (2006) 4 SCC 1 (xiv) 2011 (1) ALD, Page 234 (xv) 2018(2)ALD page 282 (xvi) 2020(4)ALD page 379 THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.3945 OF 2023

ORDER:

Heard Sri Ch.Ganesh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5 and Sri Pradeep Reddy Katta, learned Standing Counsel for ZPP & MPP appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.4 and 6.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“…to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents in not treating the temporary appointment provided to the petitioner as attender on compassionate grounds in the year 2004 to till date by even not paying worked period wages from 18 long to years, ignoring legitimate wages payable to the petitioner as per Section 13 and 15 of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Section 4 of Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 R/W Article 14, 16, 21, 39 (d), 43 & 300 (A) of our Constitution, as regular one in last grade post for all purposes, as highly illegal, unjust, unfair and violation of the provisions of the said Acts and our Constitution and prays to direct the respondents herein treat the petitioner as a regular one in the last grade post by applying the principle laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CA No. 6798 of 2019 dated 02.09.2019 in the case of Prem Singh Vs. State of U.P. (2019 (1) SCC-516) and with further direction to release all the worked period wages in attender post to the petitioner from the year 2004 to till date with arrears with all consequential monetary benefits of the last grade post along with periodical increments from time to time with 100% compensation on arrears of pay as per the principle laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CA No. 3416-3445 of 2010 dated 19.02.2019 in the case of Union of India Vs. Avatar Chand (2019 3 ALD SC 32) by awarding heavy cost and pass.....”

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner placing reliance on the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the present writ petition pertaining in particular, to the services rendered by petitioner with the respondents herein for more than a decade contends that the petitioner is entitled for the relief as prayed for in the present writ petition.

PERUSED THE RECORD:-

DI SCUSSI ON AND CONCLUSI ON:-

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the subject issue in the present case is squarely covered by the order of this Court, dated 08.09.2010 passed in W.P.No.24377 of 2007 reported in

2011(1) ALD, Page 234 as confirmed in W.A.No.782 of 2010, dated 10.06.2013 and also order, dated 19.09.2017 pa