I N THE HI GH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WRI T PETI TI ON No.9594 OF 2020 Between:

B.Lakshmamma … Petitioner And The State of Telangana & others … Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 15.04.2025 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 HON’BLE MRS JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.9594 OF 2020 % 15.04.2025 Between:

# G.Lakshmamma … Petitioner And $ The State of Telangana & others … Respondents < Gist:

> Head Note:

! Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri J.M.Naidu ^ Counsel for Respondent No.1 : Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I I ^ Counsel for Respondent No.2: Sri S.Bhoopal Reddy, learned standing counsel ? Cases Referred:

(i) 2025 I NSC 144 (ii) 2024 LawSuit(SC) 1209 (iii) (2017) 1 SCC 148 (iv) 2010(9) SCC 247 (v) 2015 SCC Online SC 1797 (vi) (2015) 8 SCC 265 (vii) (2014) 7 SCC 223 (viii) Judgment of this Court dated 06.12.2022 passed in W.P.No.27602 of 2019 which had been upheld by Division Bench of this Court in WA No.937 of 2023 dated 10.10.2023 and also confirmed by the order of Apex Court dated

09.08.2024 in SLP No.32847 of 2024.

(ix) 2006 (4) SCC 1 HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.9594 OF 2020

ORDER:

Heard Sri J.M.Naidu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I I appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 and Sri S.Bhoopal Reddy,learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner 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 declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in not regularizing the services of the petitioner along with the revised pay scales of 2010 and 2015 vide proceedings Rc. No. G/TS/065712016 dated 28/01/2020 is illegal arbitrary and violative of Art 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from the Judgment of Supreme Court of India in Preen Singh V State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in 2019 Law Suit (SC)1557 and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner with revised pay scales of 2010 and 2015 including arrears of salary seniority promotion and other benefits and pass…”

3. It is specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as daily wage worker in 2^nd respondent school on 20.06.1991, subsequently posted as watchman at Narsingi/girls. The petitioner’s services were not regularized as class VI employee by the respondents even after working for 10 years as watchman, against which the petitioner preferred writ petition i.e., W.P.No.24021 of 2004 seeking for regularization of services and the said writ petition was disposed by this court on 08.08.2019 directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of services but the respondents rejected the case of the petitioner violating the earlier orders of this court passed in favour of the petitioner and also the principles of natural justice.

It is further the case of the petitioner that services of similarly situated persons, like the petitioner, were regularized by the respondents but the case of the petitioner is not being considered by the respondents. Aggrieved by the discrimination being faced by the petitioner, the petitioner preferred the present writ petition.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD:-

A. The relevant portion of the impugned proceedings Rc.No.G/ TS/ 0657/ 2016, dated 28.01.2020 passed by the

2^nd respondent is extracted hereunder:-

(b) That as per the G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance &

Planning (FW.PC.I I I ) Dept.dated 22.04.1994 is mandatory to fulfill the condition of completion of 5 years of service as on 25.11.1993 in order to regul