THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 13950 of 2002 Dated: 07.03.2006 Between: P. Appa Rao, S/o Raminaidu, Mazdoor (Skilled), Agricultural Research Centre, Seethampeta, Srikakulam District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Government of A.P., rep. By its Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 13950 of 2002 Order: By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to regularize his services with effect from the date of completion of five years either in the post of Agricultural Extension Officer or in the post of Sub-Assistant by paying difference of arrears of skilled wages from the date of inception of service and with all consequential and attendant benefits. After admitting the writ petition, this Court, by interim order dated 19.09.2002 passed in W.P.M.P. No. 17399 of 2002, directed the respondents to pay the skilled wages to the petitioner. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3, on instructions, submits that as per the directions of this Court, respondents paying the skilled wages to the petitioner. However, he submits that respondent No.1-Government issued G.O. Ms. No. 212, dated 22.04.1994 formulating a scheme of regularization of casual employees, and as per the said scheme, respondent Nos.2 and 3 prepared a seniority list of casual employees and as per the said seniority list they are regularizing the services of the casual employees. He denied the allegation that ignoring the petitioner one K. Ramana Kumari, who is junior to him, was regularized, and submitted that the said K. Ramana Kumari belongs to BC-D (Woman), whereas the petitioner belongs to BC-A, and as per the roster point she was given appointment under BC-D (Woman). He further submits that the petitioner’s turn has not yet come and as and when his turn comes his case would be considered for regularization subject to seniority, suitability, rule of reservation and other conditions mentioned in the said G.O. Having regard to the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 that as and when his turn comes, the case of the petitioner would be considered for regularization, without going into the merits of the matter, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization as and when his turn comes and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 07.03.2006 Nsr/Ksr