HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 11902 OF 2009 DATED 27TH OCTOBER, 2009. BETWEEN Mallaiah and ors …Petitioners And The State of AP, rep. by its Secretary, Finance & Planning Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and ors. …Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 11902 OF 2009 ORDER: ( per VE.J.) All the petitioners herein, who were the applicants before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal filed OA.No. 38 of 2006 to declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing their services as illegal and arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the respondents to regularize theirs services in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 1320, MA, dated 15.12.1981 and G.O.Ms.No. 300, MA, dated 24.06.1985 from the date of completion of five years of service. The said OA was dismissed by an order dated 09.06.2008 holding that the petitioners/applicants are not entitled to claim regularization in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 1320, MA, dated 15.12.1981 and G.O.Ms.No. 300, MA, dated 24.06.1985 inasmuch as they were not in service either on the date of issue of the said Government Orders or on the cut off dates therein. It was further held that though their services can be regularized in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 212, dated 22.04.1994, but there is no such plea taken by them in the OA. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners filed the present Writ Petition to declare that the petitioners are entitled for regularization of their services in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 1320, MA, dated 15.12.1981, G.O.Ms.No. 300, MA, dt.24.06.1985 r/w. G.O.Rt.No.1211, MA, dated 18.10.1989 from the date of completion of five years of service. Heard Sri P.Raghavendra Reddy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Services-1 appearing for the respondents. We are of the opinion that no Writ of Mandamus can be issued against the orders of the Tribunal as much as this Court has got only power of judicial review over the orders of the Tribunal. The petitioners had sought relief of regularization of their services in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 1320, MA, dated 15.12.1981, G.O.Ms.No. 300, MA, dt.24.06.1985, but not in terms of G.O.Rt.No.1211, MA, dt.18.10.1989. For the first time, they seek relief stating that they are entitled to be regularized in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22-4-1994 also. However, that was not the relief claimed by them before the Tribunal. The petitioners were appointed as NMRs in between September, 1985 and September, 1986 and their services were terminated in the year 1990 without following procedure laid down in the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. Questioning the same, the petitioners raised Industrial Disputes vide I.D.No. 162 of 1994 and batch before the Labour Court-III, Hyderabad. By common Award dated 05.10.1995, the Labour Court disposed of the said IDs directing the fourth respondent-Municipality to reinstate the petitioners in service with continuity of service, but without back-wages. Questioning the said Award, respondents filed Writ Petition No. 7782 of 1996 before this Court. The said Writ Petition was dismissed for default by an order dated 14.02.2002 and ultimately the petitioners were reinstated into service vide proceedings in Rc.No.2140/97-C1, dated 04.11.1997. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were allowed to draw minimum time scale as per the order dated 30.03.1999 of the Municipal Commissioner, Mahaboobnagar and that their services are entitled to be regularized in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 1320, MA, dated 15.12.1981, G.O.Ms.No. 300, MA, dt.24.06.1985, which were issued prior to G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. It is submitted that even as per the orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No. 212, dated 22-4-1994 the petitioners have completed five years of service and therefore they are entitled for regularization of their services even after the orders in G.O.Ms.No. 212, dated 22.4.1994. We have perused the aforesaid Government Orders. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No. 212, Finance and Planning, dated 22.04.1994, in super-session of G.O.Ms.No. 1320, MA, dated 15.12.1981, G.O.Ms.No. 300, MA, dt.24.06.1985, including G.O.Ms.No… 193, General Administration Department, dated 14.03.1990 and keeping in view the judgments of the Apex Court in this regard decided the services of such employees who worked continuously for a minimum period of five years and are continuing as on 25.11.1993 for regularization by the appointing authorities subject to fulfilment of the following conditions: 1. The persons appointed should possess the qualifications prescribed as per rules in force as on the date from which his/her services have to be regularized. 2. They should be within the age limits as on the date of appointment as NMR/Daily wage employee. 3. The rule of reservation wherever applicable will be followed and back-log will be set-off against future vacancies. 4. Sponsoring of candidates from Employment Exchange is relaxed. 5. Absorption shall be against clear vacancies of posts considered necessary to be continued as per workload excluding the vacancies already notified to the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission/District Selection Committee. 6. In the case of work-charged Establishment, where there will be no clear vacancies, because of the fact that the expenditure on Work-charged is at a fixed percentage of P.S. charges and as soon as the work is over the services of work-charged establishment will have to be terminated, they shall be adjusted in the other departments, District Offices provided there are clear vacancies of last Grade Service.” The said Government Order was given statutory effect to vide Amendment Acts 3 of 1998 and 27 of 1998 while amending the Act 2 of 1994 and therefore, as per the amended Acts stated supra, persons who worked continuously for a minimum period of five years and are continuing as on cut off date 25.11.1993 be regularized subject to fulfilling the conditions enumerated above. The said amendment Acts were upheld by the Supreme Court in the case A.Manjula Bhashini Vs. Managing Director, A.P. Women’s Cooperative Finance Corporation Limited {2009(5) ALD 58 (SC)}. For the foregoing discussion, we dispose of the Writ Petition directing the fourth respondent to consider the cases of the petitioners for regularization subject to fulfilment of the conditions enumerated in G.O.Ms.No. 212, F&P, dated 22.04.1994, keeping in view the judgment of the Supreme Court in A.Manjula Bhashini (supra). No order as to costs. ---------------------------- JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH ------------------------------------- JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Dated 27th October, 2009. Msnr.