IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 14957 of 2008 Between: The Commissioner, Palasa Kasibugga Municipality, Srikakulam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 G. Sudhakar Rao, Attender-cum-Sweeper, Palasa Kasibugga Municipality, R/o. Palasa, Srikakulam District. 2 The Special Officer, Palasa-Kasibugga Municipality, Srikakulam District - 520 001. 3 The Commissioner and Director of Municipal Adminstration, MCH Complex, 4th floor, Hyderabad. 4 The State of A.P. Rep by its Secretary, MA and UD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to and in connection with order in OA No. 6666/2002 dt. 31-12-2007 on the ﬁle of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad and to declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and constrary and quash the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.NAGESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR MUNCIPAL ADMN. & URBAN DEV. The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD Writ Petition No.14957 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is ﬁled by the Palasa Kasibugga Municipality, Srikakulam district, challenging the order passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in O.A.No.6666 of 2002 dated 31-12-2007, by virtue of which the petitioner was directed to consider the case of respondent for regularisation of his service, as per the direction given by the Tribunal in O.A.No.2903 of 2002 vide its order dated 13-03-2002. 2. The details relevant for deciding this writ petition are that the ﬁrst respondent herein is the applicant who ﬁled the above O.A. challenging the proceedings dated 10-05-2002 informing him that he is not entitled for regularisation of his service. The case of the applicant was that he was initially appointed as Attender-cum-Sweeper in the Gram Panchayat of Kasibugga on 01-04-1995 on NMR basis on consolidated pay, in a clear vacancy, and later the Gram Panchayat was formed as Palasa-Kasibugga Municipality and as such, he is entitled to regularisation of service. When the petitioner failed to regularise his service, the applicant moved the Tribunal by way of O.A.No.2903 of 2002, which was disposed of directing the petitioner to examine the case of the applicant for regularisation and pass appropriate orders in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22-04-1994. Thereafter, the petitioner had issued proceedings dated 10-05-2002 rejecting his claim, against which the present O.A. is ﬁled. The Tribunal after considering the rival contentions, set aside the proceedings dated 10-05-2002 and directed the petitioner to comply with the order in O.A.No.2903 of 2002 dated 13-03-2002. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was appointed on contract basis and he had not put in continuous service of ﬁve years and as such, he was removed from service. Learned counsel further contended that the case of applicant does not come within the scheme of G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22-04-1994 and as he was appointed on 01-04-1995, the question of regularisation of his service does not arise. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for ﬁrst respondent submitted that the ﬁrst respondent was working as Attender in Gram Panchayat and pursuant to the earlier order of the Tribunal, his case for regularisation was examined and rejected on the ground that it will not come within the purview of G.O.Ms.No.212. He also contended that the Tribunal gave positive direction to re-employ the ﬁrst respondent, but he was removed from service on 01-02-2008 as there was no interim order granted in this writ petition. 5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. It is seen from the record that when the applicant had ﬁled O.A.No.2903 of 2002 seeking regularisation of his services as Attender-cum-Sweeper in the petitioner – Municipality, the same was disposed of directing the employer to examine the case for regularisation taking into account the clear vacancies, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22-4-1994. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner had rejected the claim of the applicant on the ground that his case is not covered by the said G.O. The applicant had been working as Attender-cum- Sweeper since 01-4-1995 and he had put in more than 13 years of service. Further, the order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.2903 of 2002 had become ﬁnal and as such, the petitioner is under obligation to implement the order. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it just and proper to direct the petitioner to re-employ the ﬁrst respondent – applicant forthwith on NMR basis on the same terms and conditions as governed earlier. 6. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. The ﬁrst respondent is at liberty to pursue his remedies in regard to his removal from service before the appropriate Forum. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ________________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J. 18-09-2008 bsc