I N THE HI GH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WRI T PETI TI ON No.24619 OF 2020 Between:

Sri Kanchi Yadamma … Petitioner And The State of Telangana & 3 Others … Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 28.07.2025 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.24619 OF 2020 % 28.07.2025 Between:

# Sri Kanchi Yadamma … Petitioner And $ The State of Telangana & 3 Others … Respondents Gist:

> Head Note:

! Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Ch.Ganesh ^ Counsel for Respondent No.1 to 3: AGP for Services-I ^ Counsel for Respondent No.4: Sri Kishore Rao Puskuru, learned standing counsel ? Cases Referred:

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

(ii) 1990(2) SCC Page 396 (iii) 2025 I NSC 144 (iv) 2024 Law Suit(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 HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No. 24619 OF 2020

ORDER:

Heard Sri Ch.Ganesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Rural Development, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 3, learned Government Pleader for Finance Planning, appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 and Sri Kishore Rao Puskuru, learned Standing Counsel for TG Zilla Parishads, appearing on behalf of respondent No.4.

2. The petitioner approached this Court with the following prayer:

“…to declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of petitioner in the last grade post, even after exhaust of all his life energies , youth since 38 long years, as unjust, unfair and illegal and consequently, prays to direct the Respondents herein to regularize the services of the petitioner as per G.O.Ms.No.212, dated. 22.04.1994, by applying the old rules as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Y.V.Rangaiah and Ors Vs. J.Sreenivasa Rao and Ots (AIR 1983 SC 852) by treating him as Full Time Sweeper as per his appointment letter and letter of the Headmaster dated.16.02.1984, from the date of his eligibility on par with his immediate junior with all consequential monetary benefits including seniority in the Last Grade Post by applying principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.Srinivasulu Vs. The Nellore Municipal Corporation, Rep. by its Commissioner in Civil Appeal No. 6318 of 2015, dated. 17.08.2015, and also on her retirement grant gratuity and pension as per the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Prem Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh in Civil Appeal No.6798 of 2019, Netram Sahu Vs. State of Chattisgarh in Civil Appeal No. 1254 of 2018, 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 passed in W.P.No.27217 of 2017 reported in 2018 (2) ALD Page 282 and also the order, dated 21.04.2020 passed in W.P.No.23057 o