HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.30017 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 Sri Pradeep Reddy Katta, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4.

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 call for records to declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner from the date of initial appointment by taking irrelevant and illogical date in issuing Proc No. A3/2615/2004-35, dt 22.12.2018 in regularizing the services of the petitioner w. e. f. 22. 12. 2018 instead of 25.11.1993 on par with colleague contingent sweepers whose services were regularized in Procs No. A3/334/2012, dt 04.09.2018 w.e.f 25.11.1993 as highly illegal, discriminatory, unconstitutional, totally arbitrary unjust and unfair and amounts to violation of Articles 14, 16, 21, 39(d),43 and 300(A) of our Constitution and prays to direct the respondents herein to modify the regularization orders of petitioner issued in Proc No.A3/2615/2004-35, dt 22.12.2018 of 5^th respondent reregularized the services of the petitioner in the last grade post w.e.f 25.11.1993 on par with colleague sweepers by applying similar yardstick as applied in the similar case of 24 colleague full time sweepers of petitioners listed in Procs No. A3/680/86, dt 27.4.1987 and regularization of their services w. e. f. 25. 11. 1993 in Procs No.A3/384/2012, dt 4.9.2018 issued by the 5^th respondent herein per Principle laid by Apex Court in C.A.No.6318/2015, dt 17.08.2015 in the post of Office subordinates with all consequential monetary benefits in last grade pay with periodical increments revised from time to time in the PRC scales with usual allowance w.e.f 25.11.1993 with arrears of pay with 100% compensation by sanctioning pension gratuity and other retirement benefits on par with similarly situated persons in Proc No. A3/384/2012, dt

04.09.2018 and pass…”

3. The case of the petitioner in brief as per the averments made in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present Writ Petition is as under:-

The petitioner was initially appointed as a part-time sweeper on 06.11.1984 at the Zilla Praja Parishad Secondary School, Jammikunta. The petitioner’s services were converted to that of a full-time Attender on 27.04.1987, along with 14 other contingent sweepers. While the services of similarly situated colleagues were regularized with effect from 25.11.1993 pursuant to the orders passed in O.A. No. 477/2012 and the same was upheld in W.P. No. 28549/2016 dated 21.03.2017, by the Hon’ble High Court, the petitioner’s services were regularized belatedly, only on 22.12.2018, vide proceedings No.

A3/2615/2004-33, without extending the same retrospective benefit.

Although the petitioner had completed five years of continuous full-time service by 27.04.1992, regularization from the appropriate date was denied solely on the ground that the petitioner had not approached the Tribunal or the High Court earlier, unlike the petitioner’s colleagues. The petitioner’s case is that such denial is discriminatory, particularly when the Hon’ble Supreme Court in C.A. No. 6318/2015 dated 17.08.2015 has held that benefits under G.O.Ms.No.212 cannot be denied merely on account of delay in seeking legal remedy. Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents in granting the petitioner similar treatment, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD:-

A. The specific case of the petitioner as per the averments made at para No.5 of the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present Writ Petition is extracted hereunder:-

5. It is submitted that the petitioner 's services were regularized in the last grade post w.e.f 22.12.2018 vide Proc.