A.P. Cpdcl Of Ap Ltd., vs V. Bhaskar,
2022 Latest Caselaw 664 Tel

   THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                             AND
        THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

                           WRIT APPEAL No.18 OF 2015

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

        The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated

19.11.2013           passed         by     the      learned           Single   Judge     in

W.P.No.4015 of 2006.

        The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the

respondent/employee, who is a Diploma Holder in Electrical

and Electronics Engineering, has worked as a casual labour

from September, 1996 to February, 1999 in Nalgonda Circle

of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board

(ABSEB). The appellants/employer, keeping in view the fact

that large number of employees were continuing on contract

basis, issued a Circular vide B.P.Ms.No.36 dated 18.05.1997

and it was resolved to regularise Sub-Engineers working as

contract labour in the 50% of the vacancies existing as on

18.05.1997. The appellants/employer conducted interviews

in respect of 50% of the vacancies on 12.05.2001 and

unfortunately, the respondent/employee did not find place in

the 50% of the vacancies earmarked for regularisation. The

respondent/employee submitted a representation dated

15.12.2005 to the employer. However, the said

representation was not considered, and in those

circumstances, the writ petition was preferred. The learned

Single Judge, by taking into account Clause (6) of another

Circular issued on 31.12.1997 i.e., B.P.Ms.No.271, has

disposed of the writ petition directing that as and when

regular vacancies arise, or have already arisen, the case of the

respondent/employee shall be considered based on his

representation dated 15.12.2005 for the post of Sub-

Engineer, subject to his eligibility.

Clause (6) of the aforesaid Circular reads as under:-

"6) If any court directions are received after the interviews are conducted to consider the cases of Ex-Casual Labours, Village Electricity Workers and Contract Labour, interviews may be conducted to such cases once in 3 months commencing from January, 1998, for consideration against existing vacancies/future vacancies as the case may be."

The first Circular, which was issued for regularising

casual labours, is dated 18.05.1997 and 50% of the vacancies

were to be filled up by regularising causal labours. In fact,

while the process of regularisation was going on, there were

various court cases and in order to accommodate those

persons, in whose favour the court orders were issued, the

subsequent Circular was issued on 31.12.1997.

Learned counsel for the respondent/employee has not

cited a single example before this Court, wherein a similarly

placed person who has put in less number of years of service

than the respondent/employee has been regularised and

therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the

respondent/employee, who has worked from September, 1996

to February, 1999 is certainly not entitled for regularisation,

as his case does not fall within 50% of the vacancies.

In the considered opinion of this Court, the order

passed by the learned Single Judge deserves to be set aside

and is accordingly set aside.

With the aforesaid, the writ appeal stands allowed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

_______________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J

15.02.2022 JSU