THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION Nos.6736 and 14422of 2017 And WRIT PETITION No.9210 of 2019

COMMON ORDER:

W.P.No.14422 of 2017 The case of the petitioner, as per the writ affidavit, is that he is working as contract labor under the 3^rd respondent circle of the 1^st respondent-Company from 05.07.1996 to 24.02.2006 at 132/33 KV Sub- Station, Thukkapur under D.E. (Operation) Siddipet. He possesses ITI qualification in Electrical Trade and eligible for the post of Junior Lineman, and despite his eligibility and having attended interview on 03.02.1999, his case was not considered. He filed W.P. 9285 of 1999 before this Court, wherein a direction was issued to consider his case within one month, pursuant to which, the 3^rd respondent issued letter dated 05.05.2000 rejecting the case of the petitioner. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed W.P. No. 12624 of 2001, which was disposed of by this Court by order dated 19.07.2001 directing the petitioner to make representation which the respondents were to consider within three months. The respondents had entered an agreement with the recognized union issuing BPMS No.36 dated 18.05.1997 for absorption and regularization of ex-casual, contract, and village electricity workers to the extent of 50% vacanciesexisting on that date. It is stated that similarly situated persons (petitioners in W.P. Nos. 11415 of 2002 and 6521 of 2004) were appointed by the 3^rd respondent vide order dated

24.02.2015, while he only made representations on 08.05.2015, 26.08.2016, and 20.09.2016 which remain unconsidered though he is fully eligible. He filed W.P. 36490 of 2016 alleging illegal and arbitrary denial of appointment under BPMS No. 36, and this Court by order dated 27.10.2016 directed the 3^rd respondent to consider his representation within eight weeks. The 3^rd respondent rejected his claim citing withdrawal of BPMS No. 36 retrospectively from 15.09.2006 through COO (CGM-HRD) MS No. 470 dated 15.11.2006, yet appointments continued after withdrawal, e.g., CH. Radha Krishna Reddy and CH. Prakash (vide Memo dated 11-06-2007), Mohammed Abdul Mugni Sajjad (vide Memo dated 01.02.2010), A. Durga Prasad and others (vide Memo dated 14.11.2011), B. Mukund (vide Memodated 28.03.2014), and P. Rajaiah (vide Memodated 24-02-2015). Presently, 138 Junior Lineman vacancies exist in Medak Circle according to 3^rd respondent’s letter dated 24.12.2016. The petitioner therefore assails the letter dated 05.12.2016 issued by the 3^rd respondent as illegal and arbitrary, and seeks a direction to the respondents to appoint him as Junior Lineman or suitable post.

W.P.No.6736 of 2017 The case of the petitioner, as per the writ affidavit, is that he belongs to BC-(D) community, having qualified S.S.C and I.T.I Electrical Trade and Typewriting Higher in English, worked as contract labor under the 3^rd respondent from 25-10-1995 to 30-09-1999 in the ADE Operation Rural Siddipet, and was eligible for the post of typist. He was called for interview on 03-02-1999 but was never considered by the respondents, prompting him to file W.P. No. 10345 of 2015 before this Court, wherein this Court passed interim directions on 15-04-2015. Pursuant thereto, the 3^rd respondent sought legal opinion for his appointment, and the standing counsel of TSSPDCL opined that if vacancies exist under BPMS No. 36 dated 18-05-1997, he may be considered unless impediments exist. The respondents had entered into an agreement with the recognized union issuing BPMS No. 36 for absorption and regularization of ex-casual labor, contract labor, and village electricity workers to the extent of 50% of vacancies existing on that date, but conditioned eligibility on obtaining a Court order. Similar persons filed W.P. Nos.11415 of 2002 and 6521 of 2004, whereafter the 3^rd respondent issued appointment orders dated 24.02.2015 for Medak circle. After receipt of such orders, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 19-05-2016 to the 2^nd respondent,