THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO : 23868 of 2000 Dated: 29.6.2010 Between: 1. Engineer-in-Chief, Errum Manzil, Hyderabad and others. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 S. Narayana. .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO : 23868 of 2000 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed by the writ petitioners-authorities challenging the orders of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in Rev.M.A.No.170 of 1994 in O.A.No.2848 of 1993, dated 24.12.1997. The respondent herein is the applicant before the Tribunal. He filed the above O.A. seeking to issue a direction to the authorities to issue posting orders to him and to treat the entire period of absence as compulsory wait and further direct the respondents to pay the arrears of salary with interest. It is the case of the applicant before the Tribunal that he was appointed as a Man Mazdoor on daily wages in January, 1983 under the control of the Executive Engineer, Protection Works Division, Kallur, Kurnool District (3rd respondent in O.A.). Subsequently, he was given a regular pay scale and then, placed in the Revised Scales of Pay of 1986. In October, 1987 through proceedings No.12294, dated 6.10.1987 of the Executive Engineer, Protection Works Division, the applicant along with some others was allotted to the Telugu Ganga Project and directed to report for duty there to the Srikalahasti Unit. The grievance of the applicant is that he duly reported, but was not allowed to join and asked to go back and since then, he has been making representations to the concerned authorities for employment, but of no avail. The Tribunal having observed that no evidence was adduced in support of the contention that the applicant duly reported before the Executive Engineer, Telugu Ganga Project, Srikalahasti; and that he was refused to report to duty and no copies of any representations have been filed and it is not known whether the applicant reported to the Executive Engineer, Telugu Ganga Project, Srikalahasti or not; and that as an employee on daily wages the applicant is only entitled to claim payment for the actual period of working and even if he were a regular employee, he would not be entitled to claim wages for the period of absence, dismissed the O.A. Having aggrieved by the same, the applicant filed Rev.M.A.No:170 of 1994 contending as follows: The Tribunal ought to have summoned the records to verify the correctness of the statement and figures. The applicant has specifically mentioned about the representations to the Deputy Executive Engineer, Sub division, Pebbair and also the Chief Engineer, Irrigation Department and also to the Superintending Engineer. But, the Tribunal has erred in holding that the applicant has not produced any evidence. Apart from that, he was not even allowed to submit the joining report and in this regard, he will not have any evidence to show that he was refused to join duty. The Tribunal failed to take into consideration the judgment of the Tribunal in R.P.No:17944 of 1989 which is similar to the present case. The Tribunal having considered the submissions on either side and having considered the documents, observed that in the light of the evidence produced, the judgment dated 11.11.1993 has to be reviewed and the applicant is to be given similar benefit which was given to the similarly situated person in R.P.No:17944 of 1989, and passed the following order: “The judgment in O.A.No:2848 of 1993 is reviewed and this case is also disposed on the lines indicated in R.P.No:17944 of 1989, dated 27.8.1993 and the following limited relief is granted: The case of the applicant for appointment to a last grade post in Mahaboobnagar District (Zone VI) should be considered by the Superintending Engineer without insisting upon his name being sponsored by the Exchange or the requirement of age qualification, in any immediately available or future vacancy.” Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed by the respondents-authorities. Before going into the merits of the case, the fact that remains undisputed is that the learned Counsel has brought the judgment in R.P.No:17944 of 1989 to the notice of the Tribunal so as to pass the similar orders in the present O.A and admittedly, due to oversight, the said judgment could not be considered while disposing the present O.A., as a result of which, the present O.A was dismissed on 11.11.1993. It is also not in dispute that against the judgment in R.P.No:17944 of 1989, an appeal was preferred before the Apex Court in S.L.P.No:17012 of 1994 and the said S.L.P was dismissed. Thereby, the judgment in R.P.No:17944 of 1989 has become final. In this background of the matter, the Tribunal has disposed of the present O.A on the lines indicated in R.P.No:17944 of 1989, dated 27.8.1993 by directing the writ petitioners-respondents to consider the case of the applicant for appointment to a last grade post in Mahaboobnagar District (Zone VI) without insisting upon his name being sponsored by the Exchange or the requirement of age qualification, in any immediately available or future vacancy. In the present facts and circumstances of the case coupled with the judgment passed in R.P.No:17944 of 1989, dated 27.8.1993, which has become final, We feel that there is no illegality or irregularity in the order impugned. Hence, this writ petition is devoid of merits and consequently, the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari ____________________ Justice P.S. Narayana Date: 29th June, 2010 nn. THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO :23868 of 2000 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 29/06/2010