Alladi Appa Rao vs The State Of Telangana,
2021 Latest Caselaw 3344 Tel

                                           1




            THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                          WRIT PETITION No.28103 of 2021

ORDER:

This writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage

with the consent of both parties.

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

"......to issue a writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that (a) the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioners from the date on which they completed the required service in terms of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Umadevi Vs, State of Karnataka as illegal and arbitrary, violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India (b) further declare that petitioners are entitled for regularization of their services from the date on which they completed required service in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court with all consequences benefits .....".

Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Madiraju, learned counsel appearing

for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for

Services-II appearing for the respondents.

It has been contended by the petitioners that they are

working in different cadres with the respondents and they have

completed more than ten years of service and they are entitled for

regularization of their services in terms of the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka and Others Vs.

Umadevi1 and in fact the 4th respondent has recommended their

cases for regularization to the 3rd respondent and the

recommendations submitted by the 4th respondent are pending

before the 3rd respondent. But, so far, the 3rd respondent has not

1 2006 (4) SCC 1

forwarded the proposal submitted by the 4th respondent to the

State Government.

Therefore, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had

contended that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition

directing the 3rd respondent to forward the proposal submitted by

the 4th respondent to the State Government within a reasonable

period of time and further direct the State Government to pass

appropriate orders in accordance with law. Further, the petitioners

may be permitted to submit a detailed representation to the State

Government, so as to enable the State Government to consider the

same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents

had contended that the respondents are not disputing with regard

to the proposal submitted by the 4th respondent for regularizing the

services of the petitioners to the 3rd respondent and the 3rd

respondent would forward the proposal to the State Government

within a reasonable period of time and thereafter, the State

Government will consider the case of petitioners and pass

appropriate orders in accordance with law.

This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by

the parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be

disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to forward the proposal

submitted by the 4th respondent to the State Government within a

reasonable period of time, preferably within a period of eight weeks

from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the

State Government shall consider the proposal submitted by the 3rd

respondent and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law by

duly considering the representation, which is likely to be submitted

by the petitioners, in another three months thereafter. It is needless

to state that the petitioners are permitted to submit a detailed

representation to the State Government within a period of two

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 10.11.2021 Prv