IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No. 2997 of 2004 Between: 1 T.Pydiraju, S/o Ramulu, R/o D.No.39-30-64, Punjab Hotel, Gandhinagar, Visakhapatnam. 2 V.Sanyasi Rao, s/o late Pyditalli, r/o H.No.12-157, Ganeshnagar, Near Madurawada, Pendurthi Mandal, Visakhapatnam-41. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation Ltd., 3-6-184, Urudugalli, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad, rep., by its Managing Director. 2 The District Manager, The Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation Ltd., Siripuram, VUDA Building, Visakhapatnam. 3 District Collector/ Executive Director, The Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation Ltd., Visakhapatnam. 4 Sri K.Appa Rao, c/o District Manager, The Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation Ltd., Siripuram, VUDA Building, Visakhapatnam. 5 Sri I.Satyanarayana, c/o District Manager, The Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation Ltd., Siripuram, VUDA Building, Visakhapatnam. 6 Sri K.Ranga Prasad, c/o District Manager, The Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation Ltd., Siripuram, VUDA Building, Visakhapatnam. .....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 order direction or writ particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the proceedings No.A5/3831/99 dated 9-10- 2003 of the 1st respondent Managing Director as illegal and arbitrary; and consequently direct the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners herein in the post of Attender or any other suitable post from the date of initial appointment. WRIT PETITION No.5175 of 2004 Between: 1 J.Tata Rao, S/o.Tatayya, R/o.H.No.4-11-27, Pedda Waltair Visakhapatnam-17. 2 S.K.Madeenavalli, S/o.Dariya, R/o.Nirmithi Kendra, Visakhapatnam. 3 Meddi Ramababu, S/o.Kondayya, Door No.1/1-102, A.V.out gate, visakhapatnam. 4 D.Rama Krishna Rao, S/o.Gunnayya, R/o.52-8-51, Rasavanipalem visakhapatnam. 5 P.Kanna Rao, S/o.Sanyasi, Elimenchili Post., Pata Harijanapeta, Visakhapatnam. 6 P.Bangaraiah, S/o.Palli Sinhachalam, H.No.B-21, Adarshnagar, M.V.P.Colony,Visakhapatnam. 7 Kottangi Mohan Rao, S/o.Kannayya, R/o.Kinnagi Post, visakhapatnam. 8 P.Bhima Rao, S/o.Narashima Murthy, R/o.H.No.281, Visakhapatnam-17. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The A.P. Housing Corporation Ltd., 3-6-184, Urudugalli, Himayathnagar Hyderabad. 2 The Dist.Manager,The A.P.H.C.Ltd.,Siripuram,VUDA Buildings, Visakhapatnam. 3 District Collector/Executive Director, The A.P.H.C.Ltd., Visakhapatnam. .....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 order direction or writ particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the proceedings No. A5/3831/99 dated 9-10- 2003 of the 1st respondent Managing Director as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners herein in the post of Attender or any other suitable post from the date of initial appointment. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.G.VIDYASAGAR Counsel for the Respondents: 1) MR.K.MOHAN RAMI REDDY 2) G.P. FOR HOUSING The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION Nos.2997 and 5175 of 2004 COMMON ORDER: In these two writ petitions, common questions of fact and law arise for consideration and, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order. Petitioners in both the writ petitions are all contingent employees working in A.P. Housing Corporation Limited. They claim that after completion of five years of service, though their services have not been regularized, they were being paid D.A., H.R.A. and C.C.A. in addition to the consolidated pay and subsequently they were put on regular timescale of pay attached to the post of Attender/Sweeper and were also granted annual grade increments. But, thereafter, the 1st respondent issued the impugned proceedings, dated 09.10.2003, stating that the petitioners are eligible only for minimum emoluments in the scale of pay attached to the post of Attender, under revised pay scales of 1993, but they were erroneously sanctioned annual grade increments in the time scale to which they are not entitled, as their services are not regularized, and, therefore, the concerned District Manager was directed to re-fix their pay in the minimum pay scale on par with similarly placed NMR employees and also to recover annual grade increments released from 01.01.1992 to 31.12.1999. The petitioners contend that though they have completed five years of service, their services have not been regularized, but however, after careful consideration of their cases, the benefit of timescale of pay was extended and annual grade increments were sanctioned to them from 1994 onwards, and, hence, the impugned proceedings, ordering to re-fix their pay in the minimum pay scale on par with similarly placed NMR employees and to recover annual grade increments already released for about nine years, are arbitrary and illegal. The petitioners also contend that though they have put in more than 20 years of service, their services have not been regularized and they are being paid meager salaries, and ordering recovery from their meager salary is highly arbitrary. It is the case of the respondent authorities that the petitioners, being contingent employees, are not entitled for the timescale of pay attached to the post of Attender as well as annual grade increments and, hence, the impugned proceedings were rightly issued. Admittedly, the petitioners are all contingent employees and are, therefore, not entitled for D.A. and other allowances as per regular timescale. However, right or wrong, the respondent authorities have paid all the allowances as per the timescale attached to the post of Attendar and also sanctioned annual grade increments and, after more than nine years, they realized the things and sought recovery of the amounts paid to the petitioners in excess to their eligibility. It is to be seen that the petitioners are all menial workers and it is very difficult for them to pay back the amounts, which were paid to them for about nine years, even by way of installments. Under those circumstances, the impugned order, dated 09.10.2003, insofar as ordering recovery of the amounts paid to the petitioners is set aside. However, insofar as re-fixation of the pay of the petitioners and stoppage of further payments, no interference is warranted by this Court. Further, keeping in view the long service rendered by the petitioners, the respondent authorities are directed to consider regularization of their services in any suitable post, in the existing or future vacancies, and pass appropriate orders, as per law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and communicate the same to the petitioners. The writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU 1st May, 2008. IBL To 1 The Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation Ltd., 3-6-184, Urudugalli, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad, rep., by its Managing Director. 2 The District Manager, The Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation Ltd., Siripuram, VUDA Building, Visakhapatnam. 3 District Collector/ Executive Director, The Andhra Pradesh Housing Corporation Ltd., Visakhapatnam. 4 Two CD Copies