HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 15015 OF 2017

O R D E R:

Petitioner’s case is that vide order of the 3^rd Respondent dated 13.02.2008, he was appointed as Village Servant, a post which was later re-designated as Village Revenue Assistant, for Anjapur village, along with three others who were posted to different villages on a temporary basis for six months and he has been continuously working since then. His appointment, he submits, is in accordance with Rule 6 of the A.P. Village Servants Service Rules notified in G.O.Ms.No.1849, Revenue (V.O.) Department, dated 28.10.2005, and therefore valid. Despite this, salaries attached to the post were not paid from the date of appointment.

1.1. Petitioner points out that his appointment was specifically made due to exigency of administration, and while work was taken from him, he was denied the salary for the post of Village Revenue Assistant. Due to continuous denial of salaries, he approached the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.2446 of 2013 seeking payment of salaries along with arrears from 13.02.2008 and for regularization of his services, as by then he had worked more than nine years. The Tribunal, by interim order dated 26.04.2013, directed payment of salaries with arrears within four weeks. The said O.A. was finally disposed on 23.06.2016, making the interim orders absolute, and further directing that petitioner be paid salaries in accordance with the Rules for the period he had worked and that his case for regular appointment as Village Revenue Assistant be considered within three months from the date of receipt of the order.

1.2. After expiry of three months, Petitioner submitted representations dated 10.08.2017 and 24.09.2017 requesting payment of salaries from 13.02.2008 and regularization. However, no payment was made. Since the State of Telangana has no Administrative Tribunal after bifurcation, Government employees had to approach this Court. Petitioner, therefore, being unable to file contempt before the Tribunal, filed Writ Petition No. 37957 of 2016 seeking implementation of the Tribunal’s orders. Interim directions were issued on 14.11.2016 to pay salaries and to call for explanation from the Government Pleader (Services), Telangana as to why Tribunal’s orders were not implemented. When the matter was posted for hearing, the Government Pleader produced Memo dated 31.01.2017 issued by the 4^th Respondent rejecting the claim of Petitioner for salary and regularization. The rejection Memo stated that Petitioner, along with three others, were appointed as Village Servants on 13.02.2009 (not 2008) under A.P. Village Servants Service Rules (G.O.Ms.No.1849 dated 28.10.2005 read with G.O.Ms.No.13446/V.1.1/2004-2 dated 08.03.2006). Based on this Memo, W.P.No.37957 of 2016 was closed, giving liberty to Petitioner to challenge the Memo dated 31.01.2017. The present writ petition is filed impugning the said Memo.

1.3. The Memo further stated that File No. A/9143/2006 through which appointment was made could not be traced. It was also mentioned that the post allotted to Petitioner was filled in 2012 by Smt. R. Bhagyala Laxmi through APPSC, and that similar claims of two other appointees, Sri K. Muralidhar Prasad and Sri K. Babu Rao, were rejected by the Tribunal in O.A.No.5893 of 2013 dated 14.09.2016, hence salary cannot be paid to the Petitioner as well. Petitioner states that reliance on O.A.No.5893 of 2013 is wholly misplaced. That O.A. was dismissed because Sri Muralidhar Prasad and Sri Babu Rao could not establish that they had worked and continued in service. In contrast, in O.A.No.2446 of 2013, Petitioner had conclusively established his appointment and continuance, leading to directions by the Tribunal to pay salary and consider regularization. Equating his case with the dismissed O.A.No.5893 of 2013 is arbitrary and illegal. Issuance of the Memo dated 31.01.2017 is, therefore, in defiance of the Tribunal’s binding order and amounts to contempt