I N THE HI GH COURT OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WRI T PETI TI ON No.25570 OF 2022 Between Sri S.K. Jamal Saheb … Petitioner And The State of Telangana & 4 Others … Respondents JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON: 24.07.2025 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.25570 OF 2022 % 24.07.2025 Between:

# S.K. Jamal Saheb … Petitioner And $ The State of Telangana & 4 Others … Respondents Gist:

> Head Note:

! Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Ch.Ganesh ^ Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGP for Services-I ^ Counsel for Respondent No.4: Sri Pradeep Reddy Katta, learned standing counsel ? Cases Referred:

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

(ii) 1990(2) SCC Page 396 (iii) 2025 I NSC 144 (iv) 2024 LawSuit(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) AI R 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 HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No. 25570 OF 2022

ORDER:

Heard Sri Ch. Ganesh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj Rural Development, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos 1 and 3, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Finance and Planning, appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2 and Sri. Katta Pradeep Reddy, learned Standing counsel for ZPPS and MPPS and GPSS, appearing on behalf of respondent No.4.

2. The petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“…to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to treat the services of the petitioner as regular one in the last grade post for continuously working till date in temporary post of last grade in contingent establishment on compassionate grounds from 20-03-2001 nor regularizing his services even on completion of 21 long years service by not extending the last grade pay benefits with periodical increments from time to time with effect from 20-03-2001 to till date from time to time with arrears as per GO Ms. No. 687 dated 03-10-1977 to till date is highly unjust and unfair as per Article 14, 16, 21, 39 (d), 43 and 300 (A) of Constitution of India by subjecting petitioner for exploitative enslavement due to his helpless conditions of poverty, poor social, economical and political background by taking it as advantage by the respondents in continuing her on pittance wages of Rs. 1623/- p.m. and prays to direct the respondent herein to treat the temporary services of petitioner in the last grade post of sweeper as regular one for all purposes by granting last grade pay with periodical increment revised from time to time from the date of appointment of the petitioner for working 21 long years without any service progress with 100 percentage compensation on arrears of pay as per the principle laid by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in C.A. No. 3416 - 3445 of 2010 dated 19-02-2019 in the case of Union of India Vs. Avtar Chand (2019 3 ALD SC 32) and in the case of Prem Singh Vs. State of UP and Batch cases (reported in 2019 10 SCC 516 in paras 36 and 37), in the case of Netram Sahu Vs. State of Chattisgarh and Anr. in Civil Appeal No.1254 of 2018, dated 23/03/2018, followed by DB Orders issued in the case of Kadar Basha in WP No. 26788 of 2017 dated 10-08-2017 (DB) with cost by applying aforesaid principle laid by the Hon’ble Apex Court under Article 141 of our Constitution and pass...”.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner placing reliance on the averments made in the affidavit f