IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2957 of 2009 Between: P. Heeralal, S/o. C. Late P. Eashwara Rao, R/o. H.No. 51-980/137, Indira Gandhi Nagar, Kurnool District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director Andhra Pradesh Education & Welfare Infrastructure Development Corporation 4th Floor, S.I.E. Mal Building, S.E.R.T Complex, Opp. L.B. Stadium, Fathemaidan Road, Hyderabad. 2 A.P. Schedule Caste Service Cooperative Finance Corporation Limited, Rep. by its Managing Director, Sankshema Bhavan, Masab Tank Hyderabad. 3 The District Collector/Chairman Kurnool , Kurnool District. 4 The Executive Engineer, Andhra Pradesh Education & Welfare Infrastructure Development Corporation Opp. Indoor Stadium, Kurnool, KUrnool 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not granting medical leave/earned leave are illegal, arbitrary, and opposed to Article 14 of the constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to grant the petitioner for medical leave/earned leave and pay all the consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.H.SATISH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: M.GANGA RAO(SC FOR APSCCFS,HYD) The Court made the following : ORDER The petitioner was appointed as an Attender in the year 1989 in the 2nd respondent organization. Earlier, he filed WP No.22094 of 1994 when the respondent did not regularize his services as Attender. The writ petition filed by him came to be disposed of on 26.4.1995. The relevant portion of the order reads as hereunder: “The petitioner in WP No.22094 of 1994 says in his affidavit that his services were terminated by respondents 2 and 3 on 6.12.1994 and that he was not paid salary for the month of November, 1994. This is denied in the counter, wherein it is stated that the petitioner services were terminated in October, 1994 itself. The second respondent has filed additional counter on 18.4.1995 stating that there is one post of watchman which is vacant as on 19.4.1995. The learned counsel for the petitioner asserts that besides this post, there are eight posts of Attenders which are vacant in the Head Quarters and in four sub division offices. The learned counsel for the respondents says that he has to verify this as this fact was not urged in the writ petition. As the petitioners in both the writ petitions have admittedly worked for some time in the respondent society, the society is directed to absorb the petitioners in the post of watchman or Attender or in any other equivalent post in the existing vacancies, if they are eligible, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.” The 3rd respondent issued proceedings vide RC No.4759/93,A1, dated 4.11.1995 absorbing the petitioner in the existing vacancy of Attender in the office of the Executive Engineers, Kurnool District Scheduled Castes Service Cooperative Society Limited, Kurnool. Since the respondents are not considering grant of medical leave and earned leave, he approached this Court invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. When the writ petition came up for admission, Sri M.Ganga Rao, learned Standing Counsel of AP Schedule Caste Service Cooperative Finance Corporation Limited takes notice on behalf of R2. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue takes notice on behalf of R3. The limited grievance of the petitioner is that his representations dt.24.1.2009 and 9.2.2009 for grant of medical leave and earned leave are not being considered by the 1st respondent. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the representations dated 24.1.2009 and 9.2.2009 of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. _________ 26-2-2009 rkk