1. Casual employees of merged cooperative society seek absorption into regular posts in electricity company. (Para 1 , 5 , 6 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 38322
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Laxmi Narayana Alishetty, J
K. Ashok – Appellant
Versus
Central Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited – Respondent
W.P.No.18594 of 2011|W.P.No.17856 of 2011|W.P.No.18523 of 2011|W.P.No.17789 of 2011
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Rajashekar Thallapally
For the Respondents: N. Sreedhar Reddy
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Rajashekar Thallapally
For the Respondents: N. Sreedhar Reddy
Long service in casual employment doesn't guarantee regularization, but qualified employees performing regular duties for a substantial period are entitled to have their candidature considered for available vacancies before the employer resorts to direct recruitment.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Art. 14 and 21 - A.P. Electricity Reform Act, 1998 - Absorption of casual employees - Right to consideration for regular appointment - Denying consideration to qualified employees with long service while filling vacancies through direct recruitment is arbitrary. (Paras 17, 18)
(B) Regularization of service - Long continuation in casual employment, by itself, does not confer a right to regular appointment; however, the nature of work performed, employer's conduct, qualifications of the employee, and availability of regular vacancies are relevant factors to determine if the claim deserves consideration. (Paras 15, 16)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners were casual employees of the erstwhile Sanjay RESCO, which merged into APCPDCL. They were utilized as Sub-Engineers for approximately 11 to 14 years and possessed the requisite educational qualifications for the post. Despite their long service, the respondent Corporation issued a notification to fill vacant Sub-Engineer posts through direct recruitment without considering the petitioners for absorption.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the petitioners had been continuously discharging duties as Sub-Engineers for a substantial period and were duly qualified. While the court declined to order straightaway absorption due to the lack of records regarding a formal initial selection process, it held that the petitioners could not be denied the opportunity for their candidature to be considered against available vacancies.
Issues: Whether qualified casual employees with prolonged service in a specific cadre are entitled to have their candidature considered for absorption against regular vacancies before the employer proceeds with direct recruitment of fresh candidates.
Ratio Decidendi: While long service in a temporary capacity does not automatically create a right to regularization, an employee's qualification and the continuous nature of the work performed are critical factors. It is arbitrary to ignore qualified experienced casual workers and recruit fresh candidates for the same roles.
Result: Writ Petitions disposed of with a direction to consider the petitioners' candidature for absorption/regular appointment.
Legal Category Hierarchy
- administrative law
- constitutional law
- labour and employment
Table of Contents
2. Petitioners claim right to absorption based on long service; respondents deny any right to regularisation for casual employees. (Para 7 , 8 , 10 )
3. Court noted continuous long service and qualifications of petitioners, while rejecting automatic absorption without proper selection process. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 )
4. Long continuation in casual employment does not create a right to regular appointment, but may warrant consideration against vacancies. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 )
5. Writ petitions disposed of; respondent directed to consider petitioners' candidature for absorption against available regular vacancies. (Para 19 , 20 )
6. Does long continuation in casual employment create a right to regularisation?
No, long continuation alone does not create a right to regularisation, but it is a relevant circumstance for consideration against available vacancies. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 )
7. Can casual employees claim to be treated on par with regularly recruited employees?
No, daily wage or casual employees cannot claim equal treatment with regularly recruited employees for the purpose of regularisation. (Para 11 )
8. What factors are relevant when considering absorption of casual employees?
Nature of work performed, duration of service, employer's conduct, employee's qualification, and availability of regular vacancies are relevant circumstances. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 )
COMMON ORDER:
All the Writ Petitions are filed to declare the action of Respondents in not considering the candidature of petitioners for absorption in APCPDCL against regular vacant Sub-Engineer post as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and violation of Article 14 & 21 of Constitution of India and for consequential relief.
2. Heard Sri Rajashekar Thallapally, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri N.Sreedhar Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TRANSCO.
3. Since the issue involved in all the Writ Petition is one and same, the matters are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
4. The petitioner in all the cases are the casual employees of erstwhile Sanjay Rural Electric Cooperative Society Limited, Jogipet, Medak District (for short, "Sanjay RESCO") and the array of respondents is also the same in all the Writ Petitions.
5. The averments made in the affidavits filed in support of all the Writ Petitions and the reliefs claimed therein are all same, except with regard to the length of service rendered by the petitioners therein.
6. The succinct facts of the case, as averred in the writ affidavits are that Sanjay RESCO, a registered Co-operative Society, was licensed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in July, 1982, to supply electricity to the public and was supplying electricity to consumers in 172 villages and 52 hamlets in various Mandals of Medak District.
6.1. It is further averred that pursuant to the electricity reforms and the A.P. Electricity Reform Act, 1998 , the responsibility for transmission and distribution of electricity was taken over by the A.P. TRANSCO from APSEB; that owing to financial and administrative difficulties, Sanjay RESCO was ordered to be wound up by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies vide proceedings dated 01.07.2003 and it merged into CPDCL; that at the time of winding up, 88 regular employees, 34 casual employees on consolidated monthly pay and 44 casual employees on daily wages were working in Sanjay RESCO.
6.2. It is further averred that, pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.125, Energy (PR.II) Department, dated 15.10.2004, the regular employees of various RESCOs, including 88 regular employees of Sanjay RESCO, Jogipet, were absorbed into the services of the respondent-APCPDCL; that the petitioners, being casual workers/non-regular employees, along with other similarly placed employees, filed W.P.No.23551 of 2004 seeking their absorption into the services of the APCPDCL on par with the regular employees; that the said Writ Petition was disposed of along with a batch of Writ Petitions, filed by similarly situated casual employees, with certain observations and directions.
6.3. It is further averred that the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, while upholding the winding-up of Sanjay RESCO, observed that the respondent therein could consider framing a suitable scheme for utilising the services of the non-regular employees, who include casual workers on consolidated monthly pay and casual workers on daily wage basis, subject to availability of sufficient and suitable work; that pursuant thereto, the respondent Corporation issued C.O.O.(CGM-HRD).Ms. No.426, dated 31.01.2006, prescribing guidelines for utilisation of the services of the casual employees of Sanjay RESCO by transferring them to other Divisions; that in compliance of the said Order, memo dated 26.04.2006, was issued directing the authorities concerned to utilise the services of the petitioners as Sub-Engineers at various places.
6.4. It is further averred that thereafter, the casual employees of Sanjay RESCO submitted representations seeking their permanent absorption in the respondent-Corporation; that, during the course of consideration of such representations by the respondent authorities in the year 2009, it was noted that most of the erstwhile Sanjay RESCO casual employees had been rendering services for periods ranging from 12 to 20 years and that the nature of work being performed by them could not be regard
