IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Appeal No. 991 of 2001 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 18/01/2001 in Writ Petition No.1531 of 1999 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1) The Managing Director, A.P. State Housing Corpn. Ltd., Hyderabad . 2) The District Manager (Housing), A.P. State Housing Corporation Ltd., Khammam. 3) The District Collector/Chairman (Housing), A.P. State Housing Corpn. Ltd. ... APPELLANTS AND 4) Padugula Gandhi, S/o. Kotaiah, Aged about 32 years, working as Attender on NMR basis, O/o. The Dy.E.E. (H), Khammam. 5) Md. GaffarApkhan @ Gaffar Khan, S/o. Jabbar Apkhan, Aged about 37 years, Attender on daily wages, O/o. TheDy.E.E. (H), Khammam. 6) M. Pullaiah, S/o. Balaswami, Age: about 35 years, Watchman, O/o. Asst. Engineer (H), Sattupalli, Khammam. 7) B. Pullaiah, S/o. Veeraswami, Age: about 35 years, O/o. Dy.E.E. (H), A.P. State Housing Corporation Ltd., Khammam. 8) The Secretary, Housing Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 9) The Secretary, Finance & Planning (Services) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 10) The Deputy Executive Engineer (Housing), A.P. StateHousing CorporationLtd., Khammam. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants: MR. P. UDAYA BHASKAR RAO Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: NONE APPEARED Counsel for Respondent Nos.5 to 7: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORAL JUDGMENT: (per Shri Anil R. Dave, Hon’ble the Chief Justice) 1. This appeal was notified for hearing on 10.8.2009. Nobody had appeared for the respondents and, therefore, in the interest of justice, hearing was adjourned to 12.8.2009. 2. Today, when the appeal was called for hearing, the learned advocates appearing for the respondents are absent. 3. Looking to the facts of the case, we are of the opinion that though the case has been listed for final hearing, learned advocates appearing for the respondents had not cared to appear in the appeal and, therefore, the case of the appellants was heard and the appeal is being disposed of by this judgment. 4. It has been submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the appellants – original respondents that respondent Nos.1 to 3 – original petitioner Nos.1 to 3 have died during the pendency of the appeal and, therefore, the appeal is to be abated against them. Accordingly, the appeal stands abated against respondent Nos.1 to 3 – original petitioners 1 to 3. 5. The appellants are the original respondents and they are aggrieved by order dated 18.1.2001 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.2473 of 1999. 6. By virtue of the impugned order, it has been directed that service of respondent Nos.1 to 4 – original petitioners should be regularised as and when the vacancy arises, as they had completed five years' service. 7. Being aggrieved by the afore-stated direction with regard to regularisation of respondent Nos.1 to 4 – original petitioners, this appeal has been filed by the original respondents, who are employees of the original petitioners. 8. So as to help the daily wagers, the State of Andhra Pradesh had issued G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.4.1994. By virtue of the said G.O., it was directed that those daily wagers, who were performing their duties as daily wagers and had worked for five years as on 25.11.1993 should be regularised in service, provided there were clear vacancies at the time when the services of such daily wagers were to be regularised. 9. It is an admitted fact that the sole surviving unofficial respondent viz., respondent No.4 had completed five years' service as a daily wager as on 25.11.1993. However, there was no clear vacancy at the time when the order was passed. The learned Single Judge has given a direction that the said respondent employee should be regularised in service with effect from 25.11.1993. The said direction is against the spirit of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.4.1994 and the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of A. Manjula Bhashini v. The Managing Director, A.P. Women's Cooperative Finance Corporation Ltd.[1]. 10. The learned advocate appearing for the appellants has fairly submitted that respondent No.4 – original petitioner No.4 has been continued in service as a daily wager. However, his service had not been regularised because there was no clear vacancy in the cadre. It has been further submitted that pay scale of the said respondent had also been revised from time to time and thus he had been given the benefit of higher pay scale. It has also been submitted that the learned Single Judge could not have given a direction with regard to regularisation in the absence of any clear vacancy. 11. Upon hearing the learned advocate and upon looking to the facts of the case as well as the contents of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.4.1994 and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in A. Manjula Bhashini v. The Managing Director, A.P. Women's Cooperative Finance Corporation Ltd. (supra), we are of the view that the learned Single Judge could not have given a direction with regard to regularisation of respondent No.4, when existence of a clear vacancy was one of the conditions for regularisation of a daily wager and such a clear vacancy was not available on 25.11.1993. 12. In the circumstances, we quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. The appeal is accordingly allowed with no order as to costs. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ August 25, 2009 C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J svs ........REGISTRAR To 1. 2.2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WA {VSMI} [1] Civil Appeal No.3702 of 2006, decided on 6.7.2009 (B.N. Agrawal & G.S. Singhvi, JJ) (SC)