IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.25727 of 2007 Between: 1 The Agricultural Officer, Seed Multiplication Farm, Mahadeva Mangalam, Gangadara Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District. 2 The Assistant Director of Agriculture (R) Chittoor District. 3 The Joint Director of Agricultrue Chittoor, Chittoor District. 4 The Commissioner and Director of Agriculture, Hyderabad. 5 The Secretary to Government, Finance & Planning Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONERS AND R. Vasanthamma Casual Labour, N.M.R. R/o.Chinnavepanjeri Village, Gangadara , Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENT 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 issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of "Writ of Certiorari" calling for the records relating to the orders of the Hon'ble A.P. Admn, Tribunal, Hyderabad passed in OA No. 7374/2000 dt.7-7-2007 as being erroneous, illegal, and unreasonable and quash the same and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.P.VEERA REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.25727 of 2007 ORAL ORDER: (per GHULAM MOHAMMED,J) This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Certiorari to call for the records relating to the Order dated 7-7-2007 made in O.A.No.7374 of 2000 on the file of A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. Respondent herein filed the said O.A. seeking regularization of her services in a suitable post as per her eligibility. It was the case of the applicant-respondent herein that she was appointed on daily wage basis by the Agricultural Officer, Seed Multiplication Farm, Mahadeva Mangalam, Gangadara Nellore Mandal, Chittoor District in July,1987 and as she has completed five years of service, she is entitled for regularization in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance and Planning (FW.PC.II) Department, dated 22-4-1994. On the other hand, respondents before the Tribunal filed a counter stating that the applicant has been appointed as a seasonal daily wage worker and was not in continuous service; as such, she is not entitled for regularization of her services in any of the posts in the last grade service in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22-4-1994. It was further stated that the Joint Director of Agriculture is competent to appoint personnel in last grade service basing on the eligibility and other criteria. The Tribunal, after considering the rival contentions and also the table furnished along with the counter with respect to the applicant’s work with effect from January,1987 to May,1996, held that the applicant had been working continuously as daily wage worker as on the cut-off date stipulated in the said G.O. i.e. 25-11-1993, except for some artificial breaks in between July,1987 and May,1996. In view of the table given by the authorities, the Tribunal held that the stand of the respondents therein that the applicant has been engaged only for seasonal work cannot be accepted and she is entitled for regularization in any one of the existing vacancies as per her eligibility. Challenging the said Order, the present Writ Petition is filed. Learned Government Pleader for Services II appearing for the petitioners contended that the petitioner is only a seasonal daily wage casual labourer and did not work continuously for a minimum of five years from July,1987 to 25-11-1993 i.e. the cut-off date mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22-4-1994. Further, the Tribunal ought not to have given positive directions for regularization of the services of the respondent herein and the Courts/Tribunals, in almost all cases, are directing the authorities to consider the cases of the persons, who are working on daily wage/NMR basis, in terms of the statutory scheme framed by the Government, provided they fulfil the criteria laid down in the scheme. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent has completed five years of service and there is a clear vacancy; as such, the respondent is entitled to be absorbed in a suitable post as per her eligibility. We have given our earnest consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the impugned Order and other material made available on record. It is true that G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22-4-1994, which has been subsequently replaced by an Act, giving statutory flavour to the scheme framed by the Government for regularization of services, was issued for regularization and absorption of the persons, who are working on daily wage/NMR basis as on the cut-off date, subject to fulfillment of the conditions laid down therein. In the instant case, basing on the Table furnished by the petitioners herein, the Tribunal rightly found that the respondent herein has been working continuously as daily wage worker as on the cut-off date stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 25-11-1993, except for some artificial breaks and a break of one or two days, in an artificial manner, should not be taken into account and the period during 1987 till the cut-off date specified in the said G.O. should have been taken as continuous service. However, the Tribunal is not correct in giving positive direction to regularize the services of the respondent herein in any one of the existing vacancies. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petitioners are directed to consider the case of the respondent herein for regularization of her services in the existing or future vacancies, in accordance with her qualifications and eligibility, as per G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22-4-1994. Until such time, the respondent may be continued on the same terms and conditions as on the date of filing of the O.A. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. _______________________ (GHULAM MOHAMMED,J) June 19, 2008 ____________ (C.V. RAMULU,J) Office to furnish CC in one week. (B.O.) prk