THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 13989 OF 2008 O R D E R: The petitioner states that they have been employed by a Non-Governmental Organization, by name Arogyavaram Development Society, Madanapalle, (for short “the Society”). The society is said to have undertaken various developmental activities, in the field of Animal Husbandry in Chittoor District, and by the time it was wound up, or discontinued, the petitioners have put in more than 1 ½ decades of service. The petitioners state that some of the properties held by the society were allotted to the Zilla Parishad, Chittoor, the 2nd respondent herein, and in that view of the matter, the petitioners may be absorbed in the service of the 2nd respondent. They cited a precedent, in this regard. According to them, when the Semen Collection Centre established by the Society, was taken over by the Government, the then employees therein, were also absorbed in Government service. Heard Sri B. Viswanatha Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj. The petitioners were engaged in a purely private Non-Govrnmental Organization, which does not have any traces of state activity. The Society was said to be functioning with the grants from foreign countries. For certain reasons, the activities of the society were wound up. The petitioners are not able to cite any provision of law, orders of Government, or any decided case, in support of their claim that they are entitled to be absorbed in the service of the 2nd respondent. The mere fact that a building, owned by the Society, was allotted to the Zilla Parishad, cannot be treated as a factor, to confer right upon the petitioners in this regard. The instance relied upon by the petitioners is totally different from the present context. When a functional unit, which was engaged Animal Husbandry activity, is made over to the Governmental, it was but natural that the present workers therein were also absorbed. Such is not the case here. Therefore, this court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ 3rd July 2008 PAN