IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 834 of 1996 Between: Mrs. P. Atmajyothi W/o Rama Prasad R/o. V.T.Agraharam, Vizianagaram. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director, W.O.F.CO.R. Ameerpet, Behind Saradhi Studios, Hyderabad. 2 The Pranganam Officer, Telugu Bala Mahila Pragathi Pranganam. Vizianagaram. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in terminating the services of the petitioner Vide Pro.Rc.No.1/96 dated 13.1.96 of the 2nd respondent is contrary to G.O.Ms.Mo.212 dated 22.4.94 issued by the Government, as illegal, unconstitutional null and void and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to regularise the services of the petitioner from September 1988 with all benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VENKATESWARA RAO GUDAPATI Counsel for the Respondent No.1: None appeared Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner, who has been in the service of the respondent Corporation, sought a writ of Mandamus challenging the action of the respondents herein in terminating her services as per the impugned order dated 13.01.1996, inter alia, on the ground that the same is in violation of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as a Bakery Instructress on 06.09.1988 and since then she has been in service all along. However, under the impugned orders without considering her case for regularization in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994, terminated her from services. This Court on the earlier occasion after hearing in detail, passed orders on 17.11.2004 directing appearance of the first respondent especially taking into consideration the fact that the first respondent has not filed any counter affidavit and further that the interim directions granted by this Court on 24.01.996 have also not been complied with. The said notice was served on the first respondent on 27.11.2004. In spite of the same, none appeared and no representation is made on his behalf and no counter affidavit has been filed. Having considered the submissions made and also on perusal of the material, there is absolutely no justification, prima facie, to pass the impugned order of termination affecting the substantive rights of the petitioner, more so, not considering her case in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. There is also absolutely no justification either in non-filing of the counter affidavit and not even appearing in terms of the notice issued by this Court. In the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated 13.01.1996. The respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner for regularization and also continue her with all the attendant benefits including payment of salary to which she is entitled to all along. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ________________ 30.11.2004 VGB To 1 The Managing Director, W.O.F.CO.R. Ameerpet, Behind Saradhi Studios, Hyderabad. 2 The Pranganam Officer, Telugu Bala Mahila Pragathi Pranganam. Vizianagaram. 3 2CCs to the Government Pleader for Cooperation, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 4 2CD copies