IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI
K. Ramchandar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana and 3 others – Respondent
WP 46381/2022
##PAGE1##
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION NO.46381 OF 2022
DATED : 14.05.2026
Between:
A.Ramachandar
... Petitioner
AND
The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal
Secretary, MA & UD Department, Secretariat
Buildings, Hyderabad and 3 others
... Respondents
O R D E R
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is seeking a Writ of Mandamus
to call for the records relating to the impugned orders dt.22.08.2024 and
to set aside the same by declaring them as illegal, arbitrary and violative
of principles of natural justice and also contrary to the law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Punjab and
others Vs. Jagjith Singh and others, (2017) 1 SCC 148 and consequently to direct the
##PAGE2##W.P.No.46381 of 2022
2
respondents to extend the benefit of minimum time scale as per the law
laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab
and others Vs. Jagjith Singh and others (1 supra) on par with the
petitioner’s juniors and also to pay the arrears and to pass such other
order or orders.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of this Writ Petition are that the
petitioner was appointed as a Public Health Worker on 01.09.1987 on
daily wage basis in respondent No.4 organization and when his services
were terminated orally on 01.05.1993 without assigning any reasons and
without any notice, the termination order was challenged in I.D.No.163
of 1996 before the Labour Court-II, Hyderabad and vide order
dt.31.07.1998, the Labour Court granted the relief of reinstatement with
continuity of service but without back wages and the same was assailed
by respondent No.4 in W.P.No.21392 of 2002 before this Court. It is
submitted that despite being reinstated, the petitioner is receiving only
Rs.10,000/- per month, while the juniors of the petitioner are receiving
the minimum time scale and regularisation status since 16.03.2009. It is
submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of A.Manjula
Bhashini and others Vs. Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh
##PAGE3##W.P.No.46381 of 2022
3
Women’s Co-operative Finance Corporation Limited and another
citing G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance and Planning Department, dated
22.04.1994, directed the Government of Andhra Pradesh to regularise all
eligible daily wage, temporary part time employees within four months
regardless of any prior dismissed legal claims. It is submitted that
though respondent No.4, vide letter dt.28.02.2017, has addressed to the
District Collector/Chairman, Nizamabad and confirmed the availability
of 3 vacancies, the respondents have failed to regularise the services of
the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has made a
representation dt.04.05.2015 for regularisation of his services, but the
respondents have not taken any action thereon and therefore, the
petitioner filed O.A.No.6320 of 2015 and due to the Tribunal’s
abolition, the case was transferred to this Court and is pending for
consideration before this Court and that the respondents have not filed a
counter affidavit in the said case till date. The petitioner is therefore
seeking a direction to the respondents to pay minimum time scale of pay
to the petitioner on the principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’ as laid
down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and
others Vs. Jagjith Singh and others (1 supra).
W.P.No.46381 of 2022
4
3. Respondent No.4 has filed a counter affidavit stating that pursuant
to the directions of the Labour Court, the petitioner has been reinstated
into service on 11.12.2002 and since the petitioner has already been
reinstated into service, the Writ Petition filed by the Corporation has
been dismissed by this Court on 20.03.2012. It is submitted that the
petitioner was appointed as a daily wage vehicle loader in March, 1990
and not in 1987 as claimed by the petitioner and that the said fact is
confirmed by the Municipal Council records dt.11.01.1993 and that the
petitioner was reinstated
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.