HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.647 of 2002 Date of Order:21.01.2011 Between: Kurada Adilakshmi and another ..Petitioners and 1. The Government of A.P., Rep. By its Principal, Secretary Education Department and others ..Respondents The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.647 of 2002 O R D E R :- This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings in Rc.No.14036/C2-3/99- 2001, dated 20.12.2001, issued by respondent No.2 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, without jurisdiction; to set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners in the post in which they are working and pay the consequential benefits from the date they are originally appointed. The case of the petitioner as averred in the writ petition is that petitioner No.1 was appointed as scavenger on 01.06.1999 by the Special Officer, A.P.Residential School P.Kenavalasa on daily wage basis for a period of 89 days. In the proceedings it is stated that she will be terminated after completion of 89 days, without issuing any separate proceedings or by creating any artificial breaks for completion on 90th day. Again fresh proceedings were issued on the 91st day for another period of 89 days and she was continued in service right from 01.06.1989. However, from 01.06.1991, her services were utilized as cook and at present she was working as a cook. Petitioner No.1 has registered her name in the Employment Exchange, Vizianagaram on 12.09.1982. She was appointed as a cook on daily wage basis by respondent No.3 on 26.02.1989 and rendered his services till 25.04.1991 and from 11.01.1991 as Sweeper. At present she is working as Sweeper. Except the artificial breaks created on the 90th day, she is working continuously from the date of her initial appointment i.e., 26.02.1989. When the society started functioning, there were no rules for recruitment and for service conditions of its employees, they have been taken into service on adhoc basis. It is not as if the petitioners were taken in duty without following the procedure prescribed by the rules and regulations. If at all there are rules and regulations for appointment on permanent basis by the time they would have been appointed as per those rules and regulations only. At the time of appointment only adhoc rules were framed for filling up the vacant post and only after following the said rules they were appointed. The appointments were made by the District Collector and Chairman of the Residential schools, Vizianagaram after calling for the applications from the eligible candidates for filling up the posts and considering the merit in the selection, the petitioners were appointed. Accordingly, the petitioners are working. It is further submitted that they submitted number of representations seeking for regularization of their services. Basing on the said representations, respondent No.2 through his proceedings in Rc.No.C/A1-1/88, dated 15.06.1989, informed the Principals of Respondent No.2 society to issue the proceedings of regularisation of non-teaching staff working on adhoc basis by following the procedure while continuing the non-teaching staff in service. It was further confirmed that respondent No.2 further issued proceedings in Rc.6/CZ- 1/90, dated 09.03.1990; that the aspect of regularisation of the employees working under adhoc/daily wage basis prior to March, 1989 is under consideration by the Government, no appointment on permanent basis can be made with regard to the said appointment. After fixation of the staffing pattern by the respondent-society the appointments will be made on permanent basis. Further Respondent No.2 through his proceedings No.RC-36/C2-1/90, dated 31.08.1990, reiterated the same position and clarified the principals that the vacancies proposed for filling up should have arisen after 1989 and not otherwise. The principals were directed to continue all the employees working on daily wage basis. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for regularisation of their services. It is further submitted that the petitioners along with others filed writ petition No.16228 of 1991, seeking for a direction to the respondents to regularize their services. By order, dated 07.12.1991, in WP.MP.No.20729 of 1991 a direction was issued to the respondents to continue the petitioners in service without any break. Accordingly, the petitioners were continued in service. Pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.98 Edn. (Prog.I) Department, dated 08.04.1993, a selection committee was constituted with the Joint Collector, Educational Officer and the concerned principal for finalisation of the regularization of the non- teaching staff and the interviews were conducted on 07.06.1993. Petitioner No.1 passed 5th class but she was not able to read and write Telugu. Therefore, the Selection Committee sends proposals to the Government to relax the conditions of read and write Telugu, since she has been continuing in service since a longer time. As far as petitioner No.2 is concerned, on the ground that he is working in a post pertaining to the SCs category as per the roster, the Selection Committee recommended to Government for regularisation by considering the aspect of rules of reservation. Having regard to the above facts, W.P.No.16228 of 1991 was disposed of by this Court on 31.08.1999 directing the respondents to consider the recommendations made by the Selection Committee for regularization of the services of the petitioners by relaxing the conditions imposed. Therefore, the petitioner was legitimately accepting that their services would be regularized. While so, they sought to receive the proceedings in Rc.No.14036/C2-8/99, dated 01.12.1999, informing respondent No.3 that the services of the petitioners cannot be regularized on the ground that G.O.Ms.No.98, dated 08.04.1993, is superseded by G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. Questioning the above proceedings i.e., the proceedings dated 01.12.1989, the petitioners filed W.P.No.1911 of 2000 and sought for the interim direction pending the writ petition. This court granted interim direction and by virtue of the same, the petitioners are continuing in service. Finally, the Division Bench of this Court disposed of the writ petition by order, dated 13.11.2001, with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization of new G.O.Ms.No.212 F&P, dated 22.04.1994 keeping in view of the decision of this Court reported in 2001(3) ALT 366 (DB). Ignoring the same, the impugned proceedings are issued rejecting the case of the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners have not completed five years of continuous service as on 25.11.1993. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted on the earlier occasion that the petitioners have been continuously working from the date of their appointment, and the artificial break that was created in their service was only to deprive them the benefit of regularization. Therefore, the impugned order is arbitrary and illegal. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that subsequent to the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.231, dated 06.11.1998, contemplating the scheme for regularisation of services of daily wage employees who are in service as on the date of 25.11.1993 and completed five years of service as on 26.11.1998. Though reference is not made to the said G.O., the said aspect was brought to the notice of this Court. Therefore, the said G.O. has nexus with the facts of the case and it is being issued by the Government in continuation of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. On reading of the impugned order, it is clear that the said order was issued on 20.12.2001 rejecting the case of the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners have not put in five years of service as on 25.11.1993. The said ground cannot be sustained in view of the subsequent G.O.Ms.No.231, which was issued by the Government in continuance of G.O.Ms.No.212. For the said reason, the impugned order is set aside and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners in terms of the relevant G.Os including G.O.Ms.No.231, dated 06.11.1998, and the issue of regularization of services of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ G. CHANDRAIAH, J January 21, 2011 Lmv