Md.Rasheed vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 293 Tel

          HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

              WRIT PETITION (TR) No. 5611 of 2017

ORDER:

The present Writ Petition (TR) is filed to call for the

records pertaining to the proceedings No.SE/AMRSLBCP/

C1/AB/A3/2015-16/81M, dated 09.02.2016 issued by respondent

No.3 in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for regularization

of past service and set aside the same by declaring the same as

illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently, direct

the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner in

terms of the judgment of the High Court in W.P.No.6806 of

1995, dated 24.10.1995, notionally on completion of five years

of service on par with similarly situated person and confer all

consequential benefits.

2) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially

appointed as Man Mazdoor (NMR) on 28.12.1982 in Nagarjuna

Sagar Left Canal Organisation Stores Division, Miryalaguda and

later he was transferred along with others vide proceedings

dated 16.04.1987 to Srisailam Left Bank Canal Stores Division

and again he was transferred to Telugu Ganga Project, where

the petitioner and others reported for duty, the Executive

Engineer informed that they are appointed as fresh casual

labour which necessiated the petitioner and others to file

W.P.No.16836 of 1987 before this Court, which was disposed of

on 08.08.1991 with a direction that the cases of the petitioner

and others shall be considered in accordance with

G.O.Ms.No.143, Irrigation (Ser.IV) Department, dated

16.03.1984 by taking into consideration their date of

appointment as seniority. Accordingly, the candidates, who

have completed five years of service including the juniors of the

petitioner was absorbed, but the petitioner was not absorbed

unjustly though there was no termination. Thus, the petitioner

filed I.D.No.806 of 1993, one B.Satyanarayana filed

I.D.No.807/93 and R.Sreenivas filed I.D.No.37/94 before the

Labour Court, Hyderabad, for reinstatement with all benefits,

which was disposed of by way of common order, dated

22.07.1993, directing the respondents therein to issue fresh

orders for posting them as NMR daily wage workers and further

directed to consider their cases as per G.O.Ms.No.143 dated

16.03.1984 by protecting their past service, which was

confirmed by this Court by a common order, dated 24.10.1995

passed in W.P.No.6806, 6821 and 6821 of 1995. Pursuant to the

common award, the petitioner was reinstated into service as

Man Mazdoor on 24.07.1996, subsequently, he was appointed as

Office Subordinate and posted to AMR SLBC Project, Division

No.I, Gurrampode, Nalgonda on 24.06.2010 in which capacity he

is presently working. The case of the petitioner is that as per

the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.6806 of 1995, dated

24.10.1995, the petitioner is entitled to be absorbed into Work

Charged Establishment as per G.O.Ms.No.143, but despite

representations, the same was not done by the respondents on

an untenable reason that the said G.O. is not existing, which is

factually incorrect and in fact in case of one Sri K.Vijay Kumar,

who is similarly situated like the petitioner, the Government has

issued G.O.Rt.No.869, I & CAD (PW.Estt.1) Department, dated

24.11.2003, complying the orders of this Court converting him

into Work Charged Establishment, notionally in terms of

G.O.Ms.No.143, dated 16.03.1984. It is further submitted that

the Government has issued a Memo No.26418/Ser.III.1/2011-7,

dated 13.09.2014, regularizing the services of one B.Rama

Subbaiah in terms of G.O.Ms.No.143, Irrigation (Ser.V)

Department, dated 16.03.1984 and as per the orders of this

Court, notionally from the date of completion of five years of

service. Since the case of the petitioner was not considered,

the petitioner also made several representations, one being

latest given on 21.08.2014, but no orders were passed, which

necessitated the petitioner to file O.A.No.6761 of 2014 before

the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (for short

"the Tribunal"), which was disposed of on 28.11.2014, directing

the respondents to consider the representations made by the

petitioner, dated 05.01.2011 and 21.08.2014 regarding

regularization of the services and pass appropriate orders duly

taking into account the proceedings issued by the Government

in G.O.Rt.No.869, dated 24.11.2003 and Memo

No.26418/Ser.III.1/2011-7, dated 13.09.2014 and also in terms

of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.6806 of 1995,

dated 24.10.1995, within a period of eight weeks from the date

of receipt of a copy of the said Order. Since the order passed

by the Tribunal has not been complied with, the petitioner filed

C.A.No.956 of 2015, wherein notices were orders and

thereafter, respondent No.3 issued the impugned proceedings

rejecting the claim of the petitioner on untenable grounds.

3) It is further submitted that the petitioner has more than

four years eight months of past service and he has been

reinstated into service on 24.07.1996 and the respondents have

to add the service rendered by the petitioner after

reinstatement into service to past service for completion of five

years of service and on completion of five years service, the

petitioner is entitled for regularization of his services as per

G.O.Ms.No.143, dated 16.03.1984 as was done in similarly

situated person ie., Sri K.Vijay Kumar. Therefore, the

petitioner prays to set aside the impugned proceedings and

declare that the petitioner is entitled to benefit of

G.O.Ms.No.143, dated 16.03.1984 and appropriate orders may

be passed.

4) Respondent No.3 filed counter admitting that the

petitioner was initially appointed as Man Mazoor (NMR) on

28.12.1982 in Nagarjuna Sagar Left Canal Organisation Stores

Division, Miryalaguda and his subsequent transfers. It is

submitted that when the Executive Engineer had informed that

the petitioner should join as fresh casual labour, otherwise he

would not be allowed to join duty, the petitioner had

approached this Court by filing W.P.No.16836 of 1987, which

was disposed on 08.08.1991 with a direction to consider the

case of the petitioner in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.143, dated

16.03.1984 considering their seniority and appointment. It is

further submitted that in terms of G.O.Ms.No.143, dated

16.03.1984, the NMR workers should possess service of five years

at least as NMR worker for absorption into Work Charged

Establishment. As the petitioner has not completed requisite

service for absorption into Work Charged Establishment, his case

has not been considered. Therefore, the petitioner filed

I.D.No.806 of 1993 before the Labour Court for reinstatement

into service with all benefits, which was disposed of on

22.07.1994 directing the respondents therein to consider the

case of the petitioner and issue fresh orders as NMR Daily Wage

duly quoting the G.O.Ms.No.143, dated 16.03.1984 for

protecting past service and the order passed by the Labour

Court, dated 22.07.1994 was confirmed by this Court on

24.10.1995 in W.P.No.6806 of 1995. In compliance with the

orders passed by the Labour Court, which was confirmed by this

Court, the petitioner was provided fresh employment as NMR

Daily Wages worker subject to the final disposal of the Writ

Appeals filed before this Court. As per the proceedings, the

petitioner joined duty on 24.07.1996 and subsequently,

speaking orders were issued to the petitioner on 07.09.2002 vide

No.SE/AMRP.C1/S2/A3/649M duly indicating that

G.O.Ms.No.143, dated 16.03.1984 was not in force after

enactment of Act 2 of 1994. It is further submitted that the

cases in respect of Sri K.Vijay Kumar and Sri B.Ramasubbaiah

were considered as per the orders of this Court dated

09.06.1998 passed in W.P.No.16668 of 1998 and as per

G.O.Rt.No.869, I & CAD Department, dated 24.01.2003 as they

have fulfilled the conditions laid down in G.O.Ms.No.143, dated

16.03.1984. It is further submitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.143,

dated 16.03.1984, the petitioner is not eligible for absorption

into Work Charged Establishment as he has not completed

requisite service for converting him into work charged

establishment. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition

(TR).

5) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

Government Pleader for Services-II for the respondents and

perused the material available on record.

6) During the course of arguments, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is

entitled for regularization and absorption of his services in view

of his length of service and in terms of orders passed by this

Court in W.P.No.6806 of 1995, dated 24.10.1995, on par with

the similarly situated person i.e., Sri K.Vijaya Kumar.

Therefore, prayed to allow the Writ Petition (TR).

7) Learned Government Pleader for Services-II has submitted

that since the petitioner has not fulfilled the conditions laid

down in G.O.Ms.No.143, dated 16.03.1984 as he has not

completed the requisite period of service i.e., five years.

Therefore, respondent No.3 had rightly rejected the claim of

the petitioner for regularization of service and passed the well

reasoned order and prayed to dismiss the Writ Petition (TR).

8) The point that arises for consideration is whether the

petitioner is entitled for regularization of service and absorption

into Work Charged Establishment on par with the similarly

situated person?

9) As seen from the record, the undisputed facts are that the

petitioner was initially appointed as N.M.R. worker on

28.12.1982 on daily wage basis in Stores Division, Nagarjuna

Sagar Left Canal Organisation and subsequently, he was

transferred to Telugu Ganga Project, where the petitioner was

about to report duty. The Executive Engineer informed him that

he should join as a fresh casual labour. Aggrieved by the same,

the petitioner filed W.P.No.16836 of 1987 before this Court and

this Court disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to

consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with

G.O.Ms.No.143, Irrigation (Ser.V) Department, dated

16.03.1984, taking into consideration his date of appointment

and seniority. As the case of the petitioner was not considered,

he filed I.D.No.806 of 1993 before the Labour Court, Hyderabad,

for reinstatement with all benefits. By an order, dated

22.07.1994, the Labour Court disposed of the said I.D. directing

the respondent therein to issue fresh orders posting the

petitioner as NMR Daily Wage Worker and further directed to

consider his case as per G.O.Ms.No.143 by protecting his past

service. Challenging the same, the respondent authorities have

filed W.P.No.6806 of 1995 and by an order, dated 24.10.1995,

this Court dismissed the writ petition confirming the award

passed by the Labour Court in I.D.No.806 of 1993. Pursuant to

the same, the petitioner was reinstated into service as Man

Mazdoor on 24.07.1996 and subsequently he was appointed as

Office Subordinate and posted to AMR SLBC Project, Nalgonda

on 24.06.2010.

10) The record further reveals that though the petitioner

made several representations to regularize his services as per

G.O.Ms.No.143, dated 16.03.1984, the respondent authorities

have not considered his case. Therefore, the petitioner filed

O.A.No.6761 of 2014 before the Tribunal. By an order, dated

28.11.2014, the Tribunal disposed the said O.A. It is appropriate

to refer to the operative portion of the order passed by the

Tribunal, which reads as under:-

"In view of the cases and circumstances obtaining in the case, the respondents are directed to consider the representations made by the applicant, dated 05.01.2011 and 21.08.2014 regarding regularization of his services and pass appropriate orders duly taking into account the proceedings issued by the Government in G.O.Rt.No.869, I & CAD (PW.Estt.1) Department, dated 24.11.2003 and Meo No.26418/Ser.III.1/2011-7, dated 13.09.2014 and also in terms of the orders of the High Court in W.P.No.6806 of 1995, dated 24.10.1995, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

11) As the orders of the Tribunal passed in O.A.No.6761 of

2014, have not complied with by the respondents, the petitioner

filed C.A.No.956 of 2015 and after receipt of the notices in the

contempt case, respondent No.3 had passed the impugned

proceedings rejecting the claim of the applicant stating that he

has not completed five years of service.

12) The record reveals that the case of similarly situated

person by name Sri K.Vijay Kumar, who was appointed on

21.01.1983 and who was junior to the petitioner, was

considered vide G.O.Rt.No.869, dated 24.11.2003. It is

appropriate to refer to the relevant paragraphs in

G.O.Rt.No.869, dated 24.11.2003, which are as under:-

"In the reference 1st read above, Government have accorded permission to the Chief Engineer (P), NSRSP, Hyderabad, to implement the Award of the Labour Court-III, Hyderabad dt. 31.03.1997 in I.D.No. 169/94 filed by Sri K.Vijaya Kumar, NMR Work Inspector as confirmed by the Division Bench of the A.P. High Court dt. 19.11.2000 in W.A.No.1127/2000 in W.P.No.16668/98 filed by the Department against the award of the Labour Court. The Chief Engineer (P), NSRSP, Hyderabad directed that Sri K.Vijaya Kumar, NMR Work Inspector be provisionally reinstated into service with continuity of service and seniority and all other benefits except back wages, subject to the result of the Special Leave

Petition filed by the Department in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

2. In the reference 2nd read above, Government have issued orders confirming the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.7, I&CAD (PW.Estt.1) Department, dated 18.1.2001, as the Supreme Court of India has dismissed the SLP filed by the Department, vide orders dated 5.2.2001 in SLP (Civil) No.1581/2001.

3. The Superintending Engineer, AMRP Circle No.1, GV Gudem, lr. Dt. 30.4.2002 has informed that the individual has fulfilled all the conditions laid down in the G.O.Ms.No.143, Irri.Dept., dt. 16.3.1984.

4. ....

5. ....

6. In view of the above, the Chief Engineer (P) NSRSP, Hyderabad has requested for orders to convert Sri K.Vijaya Kumar, NMR into work charged category in order to comply the orders of APHC in the above said case.

7. After careful examination, Government hereby direct the CE (P), NSRSP, Hyderabad for conversion of Sri K.Vijaya Kumar, NMR Worker into Work Charged category in order to comply with the orders of the Hon'ble High Court, dated 9.6.98 in W.P.No.16668/98."

13) Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed on 28.12.1982.

Further, in terms of the order, dated 22.07.1994 passed in

I.D.No.806 of 1993, the past service of the petitioner was

protected and that the petitioner has been reinstated into

service as Man Mazdoor on 24.07.1996 and subsequently he was

appointed as Office Subordinate on 24.06.2010. Since the case

of similarly situated person, who is junior to the petitioner, was

considered stating that he has fulfilled all the conditions laid

down in G.O.Ms.No.143, dated 16.03.1984, the issuance of

impugned proceedings by respondent No.3 in rejecting the claim

of the petitioner on the ground that he has not completed five

years of service, is untenable. That apart, in the counter no

where it is stated by the respondents that the petitioner was

not in service. As the petitioner is in continuous service, which

is not disputed by the respondent authorities and in view of his

length of service, what has been given to the similarly situated

person i.e., Sri K.Vijay Kumar vide G.O.Rt.No.869, Irrigation

and CAD (PW.ESTT.1) Department, dated 24.11.2003, the same

benefit shall be given to the petitioner. Therefore, considering

the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems fit to

set aside the proceedings No.SE/AMRSLBCP/ C1/AB/A3/2015-

16/81M, dated 09.02.2016 issued by respondent No.3 in

rejecting the claim of the petitioner for regularization of past

service as the petitioner is in continuous service as on date and

the respondent authorities can be directed to regularize the

services of the petitioner in the light of the orders passed by

this Court in W.P.No.6806 of 1995, dated 24.10.1995 confirming

the orders passed in I.D.No.806 of 1993, wherein it was held

that the past service of the petitioner was protected and also in

terms of G.O.Rt.No.869, dated 24.11.2003, Irrigation and CAD

(PW.ESTT.1) Department, dated 24.11.2003, wherein the

services of the similarly situated person was converted from

NMR worker into Work Charged Category.

14) Accordingly, the Writ Petition (TR) is allowed by setting

aside the proceedings No.SE/AMRSLBCP/ C1/AB/A3/2015-

16/81M, dated 09.02.2016 issued by respondent No.3 and the

respondents authorities are directed to regularize the services

of the petitioner on completion of five years of service on par

with the similarly situated person i.e., K.Vijay Kumar and pass

appropriate orders within a period of six (06) weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this order and communicate the

same to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous application, if any pending, shall stand closed.

______________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J 23.01.2023 gkv

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

WRIT PETITION (TR) No. 5611 of 2017

Date:23.01.2023

gkv