Telangana High Court
B. Sreedevi vs The State Of Telangana, And ... on 19 October, 2023
Bench: Juvvadi Sridevi
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
WRIT PETITION No.26091 of 2019
ORDER:
Petitioner in this writ petition has questioned the action
of respondents in not regularizing her services as Lecturer.
2. Heard Ms. G.Uma Rani, learned counsel for petitioner
and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I
appearing for respondents. Perused the record.
3. Case of the petitioner is that she is working as
part-time Lecturer in Telugu, in KRR Government Arts &
Science College, Kodad since 26.07.1991 in a clear vacancy
as per the guide lines in vogue. Her case is that she has
put-in 704 working days in 3 academic years (including
Examination & Valuation duties) as on 25.11.1993, therefore,
she is entitled for regularization of her service in terms of
G.O.Ms.No.221, dated 20.06.1995. It is stated that in a
similar case when the services of one Dr.A.Chandhoji Rao a
part-time Lecturer were not regularized, he has filed
O.A.No.83 of 2010 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative
Tribunal. The said O.A was allowed on 10.04.2013 directing
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi
WP. No.26091 of 2019
for regularizing his services. The writ petition filed being
W.P.No.32779 of 2013 against the orders of the Tribunal, was
also dismissed. The subsequent review petition being
W.P.MP.No.7198 of 2014 was also dismissed by this Court on
21.03.2014. Thereafter, the matter was carried to the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in C.C.No.10776 of 2014 which was also
dismissed on 30.07.2014. Since the case of the petitioner
stands on same footing, the petitioner has prayed for
regularizing her services. It is stated that the petitioner has
earlier filed W.P.No.38880 of 2018 seeking regularization of
her services. This Court has granted interim orders directing
the respondents to consider the representation of petitioner
within a period of six weeks. Since the respondents have not
passed any orders on her representation, she filed contempt
case in C.C.No.529 of 2019, after which, the 2nd respondent
has issued proceedings dated 22.06.2019 rejecting her
application for regularization. Hence this writ petition.
4. Respondents have not filed counter affidavit. However,
basing on the written instructions, it is submitted by the
learned Assistant Government Pleader that the Government
has issued G.O.Ms.No.221, dated 20.06.1995 for
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi
WP. No.26091 of 2019
regularization of services of the part-time Lecturers working
in Government junior and degree colleges. One of the
conditions stipulated under the said G.O. for regularization of
services is that the incumbent should complete 3 academic
years of part-time service as on 30.07.1991. Since, even
according to the petitioner, as she joined as part-time
Lecturer only on 26.07.1991, she does not satisfy the above
condition. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to seek for
regularization of her services in terms of the said G.O. Hence
he prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. The sole ground pleaded by the petitioner for
regularization of her services is that she completed part-time
service of three academic years as on 25.11.1993, as she
joined on 26.07.1991. In view of the condition prescribed in
G.O.Ms.No.221, dated 20.06.1995 that one should complete
service of 3 academic years as on 30.07.1991, the petitioner
cannot rely on the said G.O as she failed to satisfy the said
condition since she could complete the service of 3 academic
years only by 25.11.1993.
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi
WP. No.26091 of 2019
6. Though the case of the petitioner does not fall under
the aforesaid GO, she cannot be denied regularization in view
of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State
of Karnataka v. Umadevi 1, as per which, the cases of
persons who have been recruited pursuant to a selection
process and who have completed 10 years of service, deserve
consideration for regularization. In the present case, it is not
in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as par-time
Lecturer on 26.07.1991 in accordance with the guidelines in
force at relevant point of time. Therefore, the aforesaid
judgment is applicable to the case of the petitioner as she is
working continuously for more than 32 years. Hence, this
Court is of the considered view that the services of petitioner
can be regularized in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Umadevi's case (supra).
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed directing the
respondents to regularize the services of petitioner as
Lecturer in Telugu by taking her date of joining as
26.07.1991 and extend all monetary and other benefits in
accordance with rules. There shall be no order as to costs.
(2006) 4 SCC 1
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi
WP. No.26091 of 2019
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall
stand closed.
_____________________
JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J
Date: 19.10.2023
lk
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi
WP. No.26091 of 2019
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
WRIT PETITION No.26091 OF 2019
Date: .10.2023
lk
