The M.P.D.O vs Ravinder Reddy And 18 Others

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3749 Tel
Judgement Date : 24 November, 2021

Telangana High Court
The M.P.D.O vs Ravinder Reddy And 18 Others on 24 November, 2021
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, A.Rajasheker Reddy
     THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                              AND
              THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY



                            WRIT APPEAL No.604 of 2019


JUDGMENT:              (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)


          The present writ appeal is arising out of the interim order

passed by the learned Single Judge in I.A.No.1 of 2017 in

W.P.No.35664 of 2017 dated 17.12.2018.

          The facts of the case reveal that the writ petitioners

(respondents No.1 to 6 before this court), working as daily wagers

on the post of Borewell Mechanic, came up before this court for grant of pay scale on par with regular employees and the learned Single Judge has passed the impugned interim order granting minimum of the pay scale, keeping in view the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Jagjit Singh1.

Sri Prabhakar Chikkudu, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 to 6/writ petitioners, has informed this Court that later on an application for vacating the interim order was also filed and the same has been dismissed. However, the main writ petition is still pending before the learned Single Judge.

This Court has carefully gone through the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge and as it is only an interim order, which has been made absolute later, the present writ appeal stands disposed of with a liberty to the parties to argue all grounds before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge is also 1 (2017) 1 SCC 148 2 requested to decide the writ petition, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from today.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 24.11.2021 vs