Telangana High Court
S.C. Purushotham And 10 Others vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others on 7 April, 2025
Author: Surepalli Nanda
Bench: Surepalli Nanda
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
WRIT PETITION No.4963 OF 2021
ORDER:
Heard Sri S.Ram Reddy, learned counsel
representing Sri K.S.Suneel, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners on record and learned
Government Pleader for Medical & Health, Family Welfare
appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. The petitioners approached the Court seeking prayer
as under:
"...to issue an order, direction or an appropriate writ
more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus,
declaring the petitioners are entitled for regularization of
their services as Lab Technician Grade II from the date
of their initial appointment in view of the law laid down
by the Division Bench of the Honourable High Court by
their judgment in W.P.No.16002/2010 dated
19/02/2020 and in view of the provision of Rule 5,
Annexure II, Class XI of the Statutory Rules issued in
GOMS No.565, dated 27/08/1979 by modifying the
order of the 3rd respondent regularizing the services of
the petitioners from the date of passing of the Lab
Technician Grade II certificate course to that of their
initial appointment and also set aside the order of the
2nd respondent in RC No.11221/VCB/2016 dated
SN, J
10/04/2017 ordering the recovery of the alleged excess
amount said to have paid to the petitioners and
consequently direct the 3rd respondent to regularize the
services of the petitioners from the date of their initial
appointment with all consequential benefits such as pay
and allowance, seniority etc and pass..."
3. It is specific case of the petitioners that the government for
the composite state of Andhra Pradesh by GO.MS. No.243, HM
and FW Department have sanctioned the posts of Lab Technician
Grade II for all the districts. The basic qualification for the post is
that the candidate must have passed the intermediate
examination and must possess a certificate of lab technician
course with proviso thereof, if candidate with their certificate of
Lab Technician is not available, a candidate with a certificate of
lab attendant may be appointed but he/she should pass the
certified lab technician course within the period of probation. As
there is no any candidate with the lab technician certificate, the
respondent no. 3 appointed the petitioners, who are with lab
attendant certificate, as lab attendants on temporary basis with
no probation.
It is the further the case of the petitioners that the training
course for Lab Technician was not conducted by any competent
SN, J
institutions till the year 2001. Thereafter the petitioners have
undergone the said course and obtained the certificate and
subsequently, on 03.09.2016, respondent No. 3 regularized the
services of the petitioners in the cadre of Lab Technician Grade
II.
It is further the case of the petitioners that some
candidates of Kurnool district have approached the Tribunal by
filing OA No.546/2006 for regularization from the date of initial
appointment and the same has been granted by the tribunal,
however, the order passed by the tribunal was challenged by the
respondents through W.P. No.16002/2010, but the same was
dismissed by the Division bench of this court on 19.02.2020.
Thereafter the District medical officer , Kurnool vide order dated
23.09.2020 regularized the services of the applicants before the
tribunal in the said O.A.No.546/2006, as Lab Technician Grade II
from the date of initial appointment. The petitioners herein are
also similarly situated as the applicants before the tribunal, as
such the order of the tribunal in the said O.a.No. 546 of 2006 will
apply to the petitioners too. Hence the petitioners preferred the
present writ petition.
4. PERUSED THE RECORD:
SN, J
A. The order of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh
High Court, dated 19.02.2020 passed in W.P.No.16002 of
2010 and in particular para Nos.11 and 12 are extracted
hereunder:-
11. A perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal
discloses, in clear terms, that the Tribunal took the said
aspect into consideration and also considered the effect of
Rule 17 (iii) (b) and 18(ii) (b) of the General Rules, and
while referring to Rule 18 (b)(ii) of the Service Rules, the
Tribunal categorically recorded a finding that the probation
of the applicants is deemed to have been extended with
retrospective effect. It is also not in dispute that till date,
the services of the respondents herein/applicants were not
terminated by the respondents for not acquiring the
required qualification.
12. Having regard to the cogent and convincing reasons
assigned by the Tribunal in the order impugned, this Court
is not inclined to take a view different from the view
expressed in the impugned order. It is also significant to
note that in respect of the similarly situated employees in
other districts, the authorities have regularized the
services of the said employees from the date of their initial
appointment. In order to demonstrate the same, learned
counsel for the respondents herein/applicants has placed
on record, during the course of arguments, i.e., an order
passed by the District Medical and Health Officxer, Ongole,
dated 29.10.2001 and the same is not in controversy. In
the considered opinion of this Court, refusing to extend the
same benefit to the respondents herein, would amount to
discrimination and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution
of India.
SN, J
B. The counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the
respondent No.3 and in particular para Nos. 7, 8 & 12 are
extracted hereunder:-
7. In reply it is submitted that the process of recovery
which is to start for of excess payment while working as
Lab-Attendant paid on par with the salary applicable to Lab
Technician Gr-II as per the proceedings of R-2
No.11221/VCB/2016, dated 10.04.2017 issued orders for
recovery of excess payment in pursuance of the
Government Memo No.12274/VCI/2015 HM&FW(CI)
Department dated 04.01.2016 which was issued on the
Appraisal Report No.128/C.No.146/&E) Department dated
04.12.2015 given in the enquiry conducted by the Director
General (V&E) Department No.GA(V&E) Dept.
8. In reply it is submitted that the petitioners were
appointed as Lab-Attendants against the post of Lab-
Technician Gr-Ii down-graded as Lab-Attendant as per the
Government clarification mentioned in the above paras.
So the contention for regular appointment as lab-
Technician Gr-II with intermediate vocational lab-
Technology Qualification does not have foot to stand as per
the orders of the Government which were in force.
Regarding conduct of training course for the appointees as
Lab-Attendants it has policy of the Government and it is
clearly mentioned in the clarification issued by the
Government that Government would take appropriate
measures to train the appointees (Lab-Attendants) so the
petitioner/petitioners were sent as in service candidates to
IPM for training course on a later date when the
Government ordered. So the petitioner were sent to
undergo training (DMLT) as in service candidate.
It is further submitted that after selection of the
petitioner/petitioners they were appointed as Lab-
Attendants (due to down grading of Lab-Technician Gr-II
post) and were awarded pay scale applicable to the post of
SN, J
Lab-Attendants the petitioners have accepted the orders
and joined duty as Lab-Attendants.
If the petitioners were reluctant to the appointment
orders as Lab-Attendants they could have refused/rejected
at that time only and would have not joined as Lab-
Attendant so contention to this extent is not correct.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that it is true that after completion of
training course, the services of the petitioners had been
regularized in the cadre of Lab Technician Grade II by the
3rd respondent vide proceedings Rc.No.1786/E7/2016,
dated 03.09.2016, however, the petitioners are entitled
for regularization of services with effect from the date of
initial appointment i.e., in the year 1995.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners in support of his submissions placed reliance
on the order of the Division Bench of this Court on the
subject issue, dated 19.02.2020 passed in W.P.No.16002
of 2010 and contends that the petitioners are also entitled
for similar relief as extended to the petitioners in W.P.No.
16002 of 2010.
SN, J
7. Learned Government Pleader for Medical & Health,
Family Welfare appearing on behalf of the respondents
does not dispute the said submissions made by the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners.
8. Taking into consideration:-
a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.
b) The submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned
Government Pleader for Medical & Health, Family Welfare
appearing on behalf of the respondents.
c) The order of the Division Bench of this Court, dated
19.02.2020 passed in W.P.No.16002 of 2010 (referred to
and extracted above).
d) The averments made in the counter affidavit filed on
behalf of the respondent No.3 (referred to and extracted
above).
The Writ Petition is disposed of directing the
respondents to consider the request of the petitioners for
regularization of petitioners' services as Lab Technician
Grade II from the date of petitioners' initial appointment
SN, J
in the year 1995 i.e., 13.08.1995 in view of the law laid
down by the Division Bench of this Court in its judgment,
dated 19.02.2020 passed in W.P.No.16002 of 2010
without reference to the impugned proceedings of the 2nd
respondent in Rc.No.1121/VCB/2016, dated 10.04.2017,
duly taking into consideration the observations of the
Division Bench of this Court in its judgment, dated
19.02.2020 passed in W.P.No.16002 of 2010 and to
extend the relief as prayed for by the petitioners in the
present Writ Petition as extended in respect of similarly
situated employees i.e., to the applicants in O.A.No.546 of
2006, , regularizing the services of the said employees
from the date of initial appointment in the year 1995,
within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt
of copy of the order in accordance to law and inconformity
with principles of natural justice, by providing an
opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners and
pass appropriate orders and duly communicate the
decision on the subject issue pertaining to regularization
of petitioners' service as Lab Technician Grade II with
effect from the date of petitioners' initial appointment as
SN, J
Medical Lab Attendant vide Proc.No.6984/E6/95, dated
13.08.1995 issued by the 3rd respondent herein to the
petitioners. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ
Petition, shall stand closed.
___________________________
MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
Date: 07.04.2025
ktm
SN, J
HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA
Dated : 07.04.2025
ktm
