THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR W.A.No.1897 of 2003 JUDGMENT (Per Sri Justice Ghulam Momammed) The respondents-APSRTC in W.P.No.20440 of 2000 filed this appeal aggrieved by the order dated 24.02.2003 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court allowing the writ petition by directing them to regularize the services of the first petitioner therein with effect from 01.01.1993 and second petitioner therein with effect from 01.07.1993 instead of 19.04.1994 and pay them all the consequential benefits as a result of such regularization, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. 2. The respondents herein, who were appointed as drivers, claim that even though they have completed 275 days of service from the date of initial appointment by 16.12.1992 and 20.11.1992 respectively, their services were not regularized on par with the other employees, but regularized only with effect from 19.04.1994. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for the appellants-Corporation contended that the learned single Judge of this Court ought to have seen that the respondents herein were appointed as casual drivers on daily wage basis, and as such, they are not entitled for regularization after completion of 240 days on par with the regular employees. 4. There is no dispute with regard to the completion of 240 days of service by the respondents by 31.12.1992 and 30.06.1993 respectively. As it is stated that the Corporation has followed the rule of regularization of the employees on completion of 240 days of continuous service from the date of initial appointment and as the learned single Judge of this Court while passing the impugned order has relied upon various judgments of this Court with regard to the regularization of the other similarly situated employees as well as modification of dates of regularization, and taken into consideration all the relevant aspects, we are of the view that there is no infirmity in the order impugned warranting interference by this Court. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date:28.09.2011 sj