THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.26740 OF 2006 Dated: 08.09.2009 Between: 1. D. Moses and 2 others. …. Petitioners And 1. A.P. Social Welfare Residential Educational Institutions Society, rep. By its Secretary, Masab Tank, Hyderabad; and another. … Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.26740 OF 2006 ORDER: This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not regularizing their services in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance and Planning (FW.PC.III) Department, dated 22.4.1994. The 1st petitioner herein was appointed in the 1st respondent society as a Sweeper and the petitioners 2 and 3 were appointed as Watchmen on 13.6.1989 and they have been continuing for the past more than 15 years. It is claimed that in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.4.1994, they are entitled for regularization on completion of five years of service. It is also alleged that though 29 similarly situated persons, who are juniors to the petitioners, are given the Revised Pay Scales, in spite of the repeated requests, the respondents failed to extend similar benefit to the petitioners. Hence, this writ petition. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the 1st respondent society, it is stated that the petitioners were engaged only on daily- wage basis and they did not fulfill the conditions laid down in G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.4.1994 and therefore their services cannot be regularized. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. At the outset, it is to be noted that a Division Bench of this Court in SECRETARY, A.P. SOCIAL WELFARE RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCEITY vs. P. VENKATA KUMARI[1] having interpreted the provisions of A.P. (Regulation of Appointments to Public Services and Rationalisation of Staff Pattern and Pay Structure) Act, 1994, (for short, ‘Act 2 of 1994’) as amended by Act 3 of 1998 and Act 27 of 1998, held that all persons who have completed five years of service as on the date of coming into force of Act 27 of 1998 shall be entitled to be considered for regularization of their services. Basing on the said judgment, this writ petition has been filed contending that the services of the petitioners shall be regularized from the year 1998. However during the pendency of this writ petition, S.L.P.Nos.5964-5981 of 2002 filed by the Government of A.P. before the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Division Bench have been allowed and by judgment dated 6.7.2009 in MANJULA BHASHINI v. AP WOMEN’S FINANCE CORPN. LTD.[2] the Supreme Court held that the relevant cut-off date to be taken into consideration for regularizing the services of such employees has to be reckoned as 25.11.1993 and not 13.08.1998. Since the judgment of the Division Bench in P. VENKATA KUMARI’S case (1 supra) relied upon by the petitioners has been reversed by the Supreme Court in MANJULA BHASHINI’S case (2 supra), the relief as prayed for in this writ petition cannot be granted. Their claim for Scale of Pay on par with regular employees holding similar posts is also untenable. As they are neither selected in the manner in which regular employees are selected, nor they are governed by the conditions of regular service, they cannot be equated with regular employees and consequently they cannot claim the regular Scale of Pay. Even assuming that some of the juniors who are similarly situated like petitioners have been granted regular Scale of Pay, the same is not a valid ground to direct the respondents to extend the said benefit to the petitioners as no Mandamus can be issued to perpetuate illegality. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 08.09.2009 gbs [1] 2001 (3) ALT 366 (D.B.) [2] (2009) 2 LAW ISC-1