Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Between vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh And Others on 8 August, 2024
APHC010182512021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3310]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 10613/2021
Between:
V. Veera Lakshmi, and Others ...PETITIONER(S)
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. K SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION (AP)
2. P VIVEK
The Court made the following:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
the following relief:-
"... to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly
one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of
the Respondent Authorities in not considering for absorption
of the petitioners' services in aided retiremental/existing
vacancies from the date of their initial appointments as the
petitioners are working for the last 5 to 16 years and in not
extending the similar benefits of various G.Os and recent
G.O.Ms.No.12, Higher Education (CE-A2) Department, dated
10.03.2021 issued as per the Common Judgment passed in
W.A.No.263 of 2019 and batch, dated 31.07.2020 and
G.O.Ms.No.18, Higher Education (C.E.A2) Department, dated
15.04.2021 and G.O.Ms.No.12, School Education (IE)
Department, dated 24.02.2021 and issuing G.Os on the basis
of pressure or orders of this Hon'ble Court, as illegal,
arbitrary, discriminatory, unconstitutional and violation of
Article 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently
direct the respondent authorities to absorb/regularisation of
the petitioners' service in grant in aid posts with all
consequential benefits from the date of petitioners initial
appointments by extending the similar benefit in terms of
G.O.Ms.No.12, Higher Education (CE-A2) Department, dated
10.03.2021 by considering the Common judgment passed in
W.A.No.263 of 2019 and batch, dt.31.07.2020 and various G.Os
issued by granting exemption from time to time as the
petitioners are working for the last 5 to 16 years of service in a
retire mental aided/existing vacancies...."
2. Heard Sri K.Satynarayana Murthy, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education,
appearing for the respondents.
3. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
matter is squarely covered by an order passed by this Court in W.P.No.11766
of 2021, dated 12.07.2024, and hence, requests this Court to pass similar
order in this petition also. The operative portion of the said order is as follows:
"Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed, while directing the
respondents to absorb the petitioners in the clear sanctioned grant-in-aid
posts with all consequential benefits as per rules existed, within a period of
four (04) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall
be no order as to costs."
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents submits that respondent No.2 has filed counter affidavit denying
all the allegations made in the petition. She further submits that the
Management of the 4th respondent-college has appointed the petitioner purely
on temporary/part time basis on a consolidated pay without any paper
notification and without following any selection procedure and without any duly
constituted selection committee, without notifying the vacancies to the
employment exchange, without having clear sanctioned aided vacancies and
without possessing minimum requisite qualifications at the time of
appointment. The salaries are being paid by the Management funds and
further, neither permission was accorded by the government for their
appointment nor salaries were paid by the government. Hence, the question of
absorption does not arise in respect of service of the petitioner. She further
submits that as per the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Official
Liquidator v. Dayanand, part time employees are not entitled to seek
regularization as they are not working against any sanctioned post and there
cannot be any permanent continuance of part-time temporary employees as
held. Part-time temporary employees in a Government run institution cannot
claim parity in salary with regular employees of the Government on the
principle of equal pay for equal work. Therefore, learned Assistant
Government Pleader vehemently opposed to allow the writ petition and prays
to dismiss the same.
5. On hearing the submissions of both the learned counsels and upon
perusing the entire material available on record, this Court deems fit to allow
the present writ petition in terms of the above said order.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed in terms of the order dated
12.07.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.No.11766 of 2021. There shall be no
order as to costs.
7. The Registry is directed to attach a copy of the order passed in
W.P.No.11766 of 2021, dated 12.07.2024 to this order.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
__________________________
Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J
BMS
