IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 25507 of 2003 Between: Ch. Satyanarayana, S/o. Samba Murthy Rajamundry, East Godavari Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Managing Director, Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. Dabagardens, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Superintending Engineer Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd. Rajamundry, East Godavari Dist. 3. The Divisional Engineeer, Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd. Rajamundry, East Godavari Dist. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the respondents particularly the action of the 3rd respondent in not taking further steps to regularise my service on the basis of the LR. No. AAO.FRO.RL.RJY.JAO.i. U2.D. No. 1442/2002 dated 19-2-2002 of the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and issue consequential direction to the respondents to regularise my services with all consequential benefits and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.THOTARAMAKOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents : SMT.E.URMILA, SC FOR EPDC LTD. ORAL ORDER: Heard both sides and at their request the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. The petitioner herein, employee of the respondents, filed this writ petition, inter alia, seeking a writ of Mandamus for regularization of his services on the basis of the recommendations made by the 2nd respondent herein on 19.2.2002. The case of the petitioner in brief is that though earlier he sought a relief on the basis of the B.P.M.S.Nos.36 and 37 dated 18.5.1997, the same was not considered. But, however, his case has been independently recommended through the proceedings dated 19.2.2002 by the Assistant Accounts Officer and in spite of the same, the matter was kept pending without passing any orders. Having heard the submissions made on either side and on perusal of the material on record, I am of the opinion that in view of the recommendation made in favour of the petitioner, there cannot be any hitch for the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly allowed directing the respondents 2 and 3 to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services, in terms of the recommendations made by the Assistant Accounts Officer on 19.2.2002 and pass orders on merits in accordance with law. No order as to costs. 28.12.2004 CVM To 1. The Managing Director, Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd. Dabagardens, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Superintending Engineer Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd. Rajamundry, East Godavari Dist. 3. The Divisional Engineeer, Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd. Rajamundry, East Godavari Dist. 4. 2 CDs. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 25507 of 2003 28.12.2004