IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION Nos.5976 & 7090 of 2006 W.P.No. 5976 of 2006 Between: The General Manager, The Singareni Collieries Co.Ltd., Srirampur, Adilabad District. ..... PET IT IONER AND 1 The Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Hyderabad. 2 Gurna Bapuji, S/o.Late Gurna Bakkaiah, R/o.Kankur Village, Mittapalli Post, Jaipur Mandal, Adilabad District. 3 Gurna Vijayalakshmi, D/o.Late.Bakkaiah, R/o.Kankur Village, Mittapalli Post, Jaipur Mandal, Adilabad District. 4 Gurna Mahender, S/o.Late.Gurna Bakkaiah, R/o.Kankur Village, Mittapalli Post, Jaipur Mandal, Adilabad District. .....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 by calling for the records from 1st respondent and quash the orders dt.23-09-2005 passed by 1st respondent in Application No.164/2003 arising out of the ﬁle No.48/16/2003-ALC-MCI dt.13-10-2003 of the Asst.Labour Commissioner (Central), Mancherial, as illegal, arbitrary and without any jurisdiction and pass such further or other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.J.PRABHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR W.P.No.7090 of 2006 Between: K.Siddaiah, s/o Guranna, r/o Giddaluru, prakasam District. ..... PET IT IONER AND 1 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, Prakasam Region, ongole, Prakasam District. 2 The Depot Manager, APSRTC, Giddalur depot, Prakasam District. .....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 a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the naturewrit of mandamus questioning the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner from the date of his original appointment though other similarly placed individuals who are juniors to him were regularized from their original date of appointment as arbitrary, illegal and discriminatory and issue a consequential direction directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date of his initial appointments with all consequential beneﬁts and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.RAVINDRANATH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.R.MANMADHA REDDY (SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.Nos.5975 & 7090 of 2006 COMMON ORDER: Heard both sides. The issue that arises for consideration in both these two writ petitions is squarely covered by the judgment of the apex Court in DIVISIONAL MANAGER, APSRTC v. P.LAKSHMOJI RAO[1], wherein it was held as under: “In view of the peculiar situation and in order to avoid the anomalies that might otherwise ensue, while we hold that the respondent-employees have failed to establish their legal rights to get the status of regular employees right from the date of their initial appointment on daily wage basis and the respective dates of regularization assigned to the respondents cannot be legally faulted, we are inclined to mould the relief in modiﬁcation of the directions given in the judgments under appeal and direct as follows: If any of the Conductors, junior to the respondents in the relevant seniority list of the concerned Division/Region, have got the beneﬁt of seniority and regularization OR are entitled to get the same by virtue of the judgments that have become ﬁnal, then the respondents who are seniors to them, shall be given the same beneﬁt on the same principle.” Following the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the above judgment and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, both the writ petitions are allowed in terms thereof. No order as to costs. ____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 19.9.2008 DA THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.Nos.5975 & 7090 of 2006 19.9.2008 [1] 2004(3) ALD 1 (SC)