Telangana High Court
The State Of Telangana And 3 vs Md. Rafiq 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.619 of 2019
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated
26.02.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.25442 of 2018.
The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the writ
petition was preferred by the respondent/writ petitioner being
aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the employer in not
considering/regularizing his case in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212,
dated 22.04.1994 by taking into account the judgment
rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
B. Srinivasulu v. Nellore Municipal Corporation in Civil
Appeal No.6318 of 2015, dated 17.08.2015 and also orders
passed by this Court in an identical case i.e, W.P.No.33936 of
2011 and batch, dated 02.05.2018.
A simple prayer was made by the learned counsel
appearing for the writ petitioner before the learned Single
Judge that the case of the writ petitioner be considered for
regularisation keeping in view the judgment delivered in
W.P.No.47828 of 2018, dated 30.01.2019 in terms of
G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994. The learned Single Judge
has simply directed the employer to consider the case of the
writ petitioner keeping in view G.O.Ms.No.212, dated
22.04.1994 and the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of B.Srinivasulu (supra), however,
has not directed regularization at any point of time. It is a
direction to consider and pass appropriate order in
accordance with law. The order passed by the learned Single
Judge is reproduced as under:
"When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue raised in
the writ petition is squarely covered by a judgment of this
Court dated 11.10.2018 in W.P.No.36733 of 2018 and
contends that appropriate orders be passed in the writ
petition directing the respondents to consider the case of
the petitioner for regularisation of his services on
completion of five years service in accordance with
G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994 with retrospective effect
for the purpose of pensionary benefits, without monetary
benefits and appropriate orders be passed.
Learned Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents had not disputed the above said fact and
contended that the issue raised in the writ petition is
squarely covered by the above said judgment.
This Court, having considered the rival submissions
of both the parties, is of the considered view that this writ
petition can be disposed of in terms of the judgment in
W.P.No.3673 of 2018 dated 11.10.2019 directing the
respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for
regularisation of his services in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212,
dated 22.04.1994 and pass appropriate orders in
accordance with law within a period of eight (08) weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
With the above observations, the writ petition is
disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall
stand closed in consequence."
In the considered opinion of this Court, as the order has
been passed only to consider the case of the writ petitioner in
accordance with law, keeping in view G.O.Ms.No.212, dated
22.04.1994 and the judgment delivered in the case of
B.Srinivasulu (supra), this Court does not find any reason to
interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The admission is declined.
Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ
appeal shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________________
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ
___________________________
A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J
24.11.2021
vs
