IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 20839 of 1999 Between: A.Ravi Kumar, E.700129, S/O A.Garata Raju, R/o Shantinagar, Eluru, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The APSRTC, Rep by its Managing Director., Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, West Godavari Region at Eluru. 3 The Depot Manager, APSRTC., Tadepalligudem Depot, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. .....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 appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents in not regularising my services from the date of my services from the date of my initial appointment with notional seniority along with consequential benefits and to pay the arrears of the wages forthwith in the interest of justice and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner :MR.S.M.SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondents : (SC FOR A.P.S.R.T.C.) The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 20839 of 1999 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner, who was appointed as a Conductor on casual basis by office order dated 13th January 1996, seeks directions for regularization of his services retrospectively from the said date. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that his father was in the service of the respondent-Corporation and he was retired from service on medical grounds. Though he was entitled for appointment on compassionate grounds, when he was denied such benefit, he approached this Court by filing writ petition No.20788 of 1995. It is submitted that by way of an interim order dated 31st October 1995, this Court directed the respondents to consider for appointing the petitioner. As such, the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds, on 13th January 1996. 3. In this writ petition, which was filed on 4th October 1999, the petitioner seeks directions for regularization of his services with effect from 13th January 1996 i.e. from the date of his initial appointment. Though a copy of the order of appointment is not filed along with the writ petition, but today, during the course of hearing, a copy of the office order dated 13th January 1996 is placed on record by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation. A perusal of the order dated 13th January 1996 shows that there is no indication of petitioner being appointed on compassionate grounds. It merely shows that the petitioner was engaged on daily wage basis as a conductor Grade-III on a daily wage of Rs.65/-. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that, as a vacancy has arisen subsequent to filing of this writ petition, the services of the petitioner were regularized vide proceedings dated 14th October 1999 issued in proceedings No.P3/255(16)/99-RM-WC, with effect from 01.01.1998 i.e. from the date of arising of the vacancy. 5. Though the petitioner seeks directions for regularization of his services with effect from 13th January 1996 on the ground that he was appointed on compassionate grounds, but the office order of appointment dated 13th January 1996 shows that the petitioner was appointed only as a Casual Conductor Grade-III on a daily wage of Rs.65/- per day. In the absence of any order of appointment on compassionate grounds initially under a particular scheme, and having encashed the benefit of such appointment pursuant to orders dated 13th January 1996, the petitioner cannot seek directions retrospectively from 13th January 1996. More over, the services of the petitioner were already regularized from the date of arising of the vacancy i.e. with effect from 01.01.1998, by proceedings dated 14th October 1999. In that view of the matter, I do not find any ground for granting further benefit of regularization with effect from 13th January 1996. 6. For these reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. The office orders dated 13th January 1996 and 14th October 1999 shall form part of the record. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 20th August 2008 ajr To 1 The Managing Director, APSRTC, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, APSRTC, West Godavari Region at Eluru. 3 The Depot Manager, APSRTC., Tadepalligudem Depot, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District.