THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK

ORDER:

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:

“…to issue a proper writ order or orders, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner while regularizing services of similarly situated persons by issuing the G.O.Ms.No. 38 Higher Education (CE) Department dated 05-09-2018 is arbitrary, illegal and discrimination and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date of his discontinuing from service and to grant all consequential benefits like arrears of salary and also future increments and to pass…”

2. Heard Sri M. Rama Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing on behalf of the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Post Graduate candidate and secured a Ph.D. in Chemistry. As such, he is fully eligible for the post of Lecturer. Therefore, in pursuance of the advertisement issued by the Madhu Malancha Society, i.e., inviting applications for the post of Lecturer in the year 1997, the petitioner, after undergoing a process of selection as per the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.12 dated 10.01.1992, including an interview, was appointed as Lecturer in Chemistry, and he joined duty on 10.06.1997. Although the appointment of the petitioner was named as a temporary post, he was treated as a permanent employee and he was also given increments as were given to the regular lecturers. It was further submitted that the petitioner is entitled and eligible for the permanent post under G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994, whereby, the Government had formulated a scheme for regularization and absorption of the persons working on daily-wage/NMR or consolidated pay. It was further submitted that the Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.9 dated 12.03.2003, taking over a number of Junior Colleges, including the petitioner’s College, but their posts were not admitted into grant-in-aid, despite the fact that they were appointed through a Selection Committee. Therefore, the petitioner and seven others were constrained to file W.P.No.5412 of 2003. Thereafter, several writ petitions were filed before this Court in respect of the same subject matter and the batch of writ petitions were disposed of vide common order dated 15.07.2005 in W.P.No.5786 of 2003 and batch, directing the respondents to continue the employees in service till a policy decision is taken by the Government regarding regularization of services of part-time Lecturers in aided posts, subject to availability of vacant posts.

4. It was further submitted that the Government preferred a writ appeal against the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge vide W.A.No.101 of 2006, which was allowed vide judgment dated 09.03.2007, setting aside the aforesaid order dated 15.07.2005 in W.P.No.5786 of 2003 and batch. Challenging the said judgment of the Division Bench, the petitioner approached the Hon’ble Apex Court and filed C.A.No.2712-2713 of 2010, which was disposed of on 13.10.2016. While so, a scheme was formulated by the Government vide Memo.No.10029/CE/A2/2014-4 dated 19.01.2015, wherein, the Government favoured direct recruitment to the above subjects in which, the teachers working in un-aided posts should also be given an opportunity to compete along with others, provided they fulfill all the eligibility criteria, except the upper age limit, which should be fixed to 45 years. It was also decided to give a weightage of ten marks to the un-aided lecturers who worked for more than ten years and an increase of marks each year, subject to a maximum of fifteen years. Further, in compliance of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court, the Government had also issued G.O.Ms.No.38, Higher Education Department, dated 05.09.2018, regularizing the services of the un-