I N THE HI GH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WRI T PETI TI ON No.35228 OF 2023 Between:

A. Venkatesh and 28 Others … Petitioners And The State of Telangana & Others … Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 23.06.2025 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.35228 OF 2023 % 23.06.2025 Between:

# A. Venkatesh and 28 Others … Petitioners And $ The State of Telangana & Others … Respondents Gist:

> Head Note:

! Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri P. Raghavender Reddy, ^ Counsel for Respondent No.1 : GP for MA&UD ^ Counsel for Respondent No.2 : GP for Finance and Planning ^ Counsel for Respondent Nos.3 & 4: Sri G. Narayana, learned standing counsel ? Cases Referred:

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

(ii) 1990(2) SCC Page 396 (iii) 2025 INSC 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) AIR 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 (xv) 1978 (1) SCC 405 HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.35228 of 2023

ORDER:

Heard Sri P. Raghavender Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for MA& UD appearing on behalf of respondent No.1, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance and Planning, appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 and Sri G. Narayana, learned Standing Counsel for Service Matters of GHMC and Agricultural Market Committee, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.3 and 4.

2. The petitioners approached this Court seeking the prayer as under:

“…to issue a Writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by calling for the records relating to the Procd.No.e-324020/B3/LWS/GHMC/2023/ 290, dt.10-8-2023 issued by the 3^rd respondent and set aside the same by declaring as illegal, arbitrary and voilative of the principles of natural justice and also contrary to the facts as admitted in counter affidavit in WP No.8179/2017 and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners in terms of law laid down by the Honourble Supreme Court in Uma Devi’s Case Reported in 2006 (4) SCC 1 as followed by this Honourable Court in WP No.27217/2017, dt. 19-9-2017 Reported in 2018 (2) ALD 282 from the date of completion of 10 years with all attendant benefits and pass...”.

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

The respondents are not regularizing the services of the petitioners from the date of completion of 10 years of service in spite of repeated request made by the petitioners. The petitioners relied on para No.4 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent Nos.3 & 4 in W.P. No.8179 of 2017 wherein it was specifically admitted that there are existing vacancies in Uppal Kalan Circle. But the 3^rd respondent has issued the impugned proceedings dated 10.08.2023 rejecting the claim of the petitioners on the ground that there are no existing vacancies to consider the claim of the petitioners for regularization. Aggrieved by the proceedings dated 10.08.2023 issued by the 3^rd respondent, the petitioners approached the Court by filing the present writ petition.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD (A) The impugned proceedings No.3240420/ B3/

LWS/ GHMC/ 2023/ 290, dated 10.08.2023 issued by the

3^rd respondent is extracted hereunder “PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMISSIONER, GREATER HYDERABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PRESENT : SRI D. RONALD ROSE., I.A.S., COMMISSIO