HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No. 13600 of 2000 ORDER: Heard Sri T.Prabhu Das, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Sri A.Sanjeev Kumar, Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent- Society. The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is for a direction to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner in the post of Grade-I Work Inspector, from the date of his substantive appointment in the said post, i.e. with effect from 24.04.1990. The petitioner is a diploma holder in Civil Engineering. On the post of Work Inspectors, in the office of the fourth respondent, being notified, and names being invited from the Employment Exchange, the petitioner appeared for selection to the posts of Grade-II Work Inspectors (Technical). A District Selection Committee was constituted of which the District Collector was the Chairman. The petitioner claims to have been selected in the said process of selection. Consequent thereto, the fourth respondent issued proceedings dated 24.04.1990 appointing him as Grade-II Work Inspector on temporary basis against the 35th roster point. The petitioner claims to have joined duty on 14.05.1990. He claims to have been given increments and the benefit of revision of pay scales; and to have been promoted as Grade I Work Inspector in November, 1999 with retrospective effect from 14.05.1996. In the counter affidavit filed by the fourth respondent, it is stated that the posts of Work Inspectors were not sanctioned in the staffing pattern of the respondent-Society vide G.O.Ms.No.200 dated 12.09.1985; proposals were submitted to the Government for regularisation of the services of the petitioner under G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994; the Government had rejected the petitioner’s case for regularization of his services on the ground that the posts of Work Inspectors were not sanctioned in G.O.Ms.No.200 dated 12.09.1985; and, hence, he was not entitled for regularization of his services in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994. Sri A.Sanjeev Kumar, Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent, would submit that, subsequent to the filing of the Writ Petition, the fourth respondent has in fact been merged with the Andhra Pradesh Education and Welfare Infrastructure Development Corporation vide G.O.Ms.No.198 dated 03.11.2008. Be that as it may, the petitioner’s request for regularization has been rejected by the Government on the ground that the posts of Work Inspectors, to which the petitioner was appointed, has not been sanctioned by the Government in the staffing pattern approved vide G.O.Ms.No.200 dated 12.09.1985. It is also evident from the facts aforementioned that the petitioner does not satisfy the requirements of having completed five years of service as on 25.11.1993, which is the requirement under G.O.Ms.No.212 for his case to be considered for regularization. No other scheme, under which the petitioner is entitled for his case to be considered for regularization, has been brought to the notice of this Court. It is not for this Court to issue a mandamus to the respondents to frame a regularization scheme, and it is only in cases where such a scheme of regularization is in existence, is an employee entitled for regularization in terms thereof. As the petitioner’s case has already been rejected by the Government, and he was held ineligible to have his services regularized under G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994, he is not entitled to the relief sought for in this Writ Petition. The Writ Petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Date:05.08.2010 usd