HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI W.P. No.4582 of 1999 Dt.03-03-2010 N.Dasu … Petitioner Vs. The Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes Co-operative Finance Corporation Ltd., Rep.by its Managing Director, Telugu Samkshama Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. And four others … Respondents O R D E R: The writ petitioner was initially appointed as NMR Attender in the 1st respondent-Corporation. Subsequently, the 3rd respondent, by proceedings dated 23.1.1995, absorbed the petitioner against the vacancy available in the Engineering Wing of the 1st respondent-Corporation at Guntur with effect from 20.4.1992 subject to final approval of the Government. However, since the said order has not been implemented, the present petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents is arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material placed on record. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 23.1.1995 were subject to final approval of the Government and that no approval was granted by the Government. That apart some of the persons working in the Engineering Department as NMRs on daily wage basis filed a writ petition in this Court and, pursuant to the order passed by this Court, they were already absorbed in the available vacancies in the Engineering Wing. Since no further vacancies were available in the Engineering Wing, the proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 23.1.1995 could not be implemented and the same were kept in abeyance. The stand taken in the counter-affidavit that no vacancies are available in the Engineering Wing could not be disputed before this Court. It is also pleaded by the respondents that in view of Act 2 of 1994 as amended by Act 3 of 1998 and Act 27 of 1998, there is a prohibition of regularization of the services of NMR/Daily wages and, therefore, on that ground also the 3rd respondent’s proceedings have been kept in abeyance. No reply affidavit is filed nor any other material could be placed before this Court by the petitioner contraverting the stand taken by the respondents. Hence, the interference by this Court is not warranted on any ground whatsoever and accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. _______________ G.ROHINI, J 3rd March, 2010. PNV