HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.11696 OF 2004 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring inaction on the part of respondents in regularizing services of the petitioner with effect from 02-01-1991 as typist and not granting monetary benefits on par with the other regular employees and not extending the scale of pay attached to the post of typist, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to regularize his services with effect from 02-01-1991. 2. It appears, petitioner was appointed as typist on daily wage basis in respondent No.2 organisation with effect from 02-01-1986. However, when his services were terminated orally on 24-10-1991, he raised a dispute in I.D. No.38 of 1992 before the Labour Court, Warangal and the Labour Court directed respondent No.2 to reinstate him into service with continuity of service and full back-wages. Though, respondent No.2 preferred W.P. No.11105 of 1996 being aggrieved of the award made by the Labour Court, during the pendency of the writ petition, petitioner was reinstated into service and half of the back-wages were paid. Ultimately, W.P. No.11105 of 1996 was dismissed and the petitioner is being continued in service. 3. Now, the grievance of petitioner is that though he is continuously working as a typist in respondent No.2 organisation since 02-01-1986 till date, neither the benefits as available under G.O. Ms. No.212 dated 22-04-1994 are extended nor his services are regularised and he is being treated as a daily wage employee till date. 4. However, it appears, during the pendency of the writ petition, in view of the interim order passed by this Court, petitioner was put on in the minimum of the time scale attached to the post of typist. 5. Now the question remains to be considered is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to regularization of his services in respondent No.2 organisation as prayed for ? 6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material made available on record. 7. The facts are not in dispute. Admittedly, petitioner was appointed as typist on daily wage basis and he has been continuously working from 02-01-1986. Though his services were terminated on 24-10-1991, in view of the award passed by the Labour Court in I.D. No.38 of 1992 dated 02-12-1995, he was reinstated into service with continuity of service and full back-wages, therefore it must be deemed that he has been in continuous service in respondent No.2 organisation since 02-01-1986. When the petitioner was out of employment, G.O.Ms. No.212 dated 22-04-1994 was issued directing all the State agencies to regularise services of such employees, who have completed more than five years of service as on 21-12-1993 against the regular vacancies that are available in the Departments/ Organisations. Since the petitioner was out of employment in view of illegal termination, his services could not be considered at that time. After reinstatement, in view of the award passed by the Labour Court, petitioner is entitled for consideration of regularization of his services as per G.O.Ms. No.212 dated 22-04-1994, since he had completed more than five years of service even by the date of his termination of services on 24-10-1991. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3702 of 2006 dated 06-07-2009 between A. MANJULA BHASHINI & OTHERS v. M.D., A.P. WOMEN’S COOP. FIN. CORPN. LTD. & ANOTHER. Paragraph Nos.42 and 43 of the said decision read as under: “The question which remains to be considered is whether the Division Bench was justified in holding that all daily wage employees who completed 5 years service on the date of enforcement of Act No.27 of 1998, i.e., 19.8.1998 would be entitled to be considered for regularization of their services. A reading of paragraphs 54, 67, 68 and 72 of the impugned judgment shows that even though the Division Bench did not find the cut off date i.e. 25.11.1993 specified in first proviso to Section 7 for determining the eligibility of daily wage employees for determining the eligibility of daily wage employees for regularization to be arbitrary, irrational or discriminatory, yet it charged the said date from 25.11.1993 to 19.8.1998 solely on the premise that Act No.27 of 1998 was enforced with effect from that date. In our view, once the Division Bench negatived the challenge to the validity of Act Nos.3 of 1998 and 27 of 1998, there was no warrant for altering the date of eligibility specified in first proviso to Section 7 of the 1994 Act and thereby extend the zone of eligibility of daily wage employees who could be considered for regularization. As a corollary, we hold that the declaration made by the Division Bench that all persons who completed 5 years service as on the date of coming into force of Act No.27 of 1998 would be entitled to be considered for regularisation of their services is legally unsustainable and is liable to be set aside. In the result, the appeals filed by the employees (C.A. Nos.3702, 3703, 3704, 3705, 3706, 3707, 3709, 3710, 3721, 3733, 3734, 3737, 3742, 3744, 3748, 3749 and 3751 of 2006) are dismissed and those filed by the State Government and agencies/instrumentalities of the State (C.A. Nos.3685, 3712, 3713, 3714, 3715, 3716, 3717, 3718, 3723, 3724, 3726, 3727, 3728, 3729, 3730, 3731, 3732, 3750, 3752, 3753, 3754 and 3755 of 2006) are allowed. The declaration made by the Division Bench that the ban on regularization will be effective from 19.8.1998 i.e. the date on which Act No.27 of 1998 came into force and that all persons who have completed 5 years service as on that date would be entitled to be considered for regularisation of service is set aside. It is, however, made clear that the daily wages employees and others who are covered by Section 7 of the 1994 Act (amended) and whose services have not been regularised so far, shall be entitled to be considered for regularization and their services shall be regularised subject to fulfillment of the conditions enumerated in G.O. dated 22.4.1994. With a view to obviate further litigation on this issue, we direct the Government of Andhra Pradesh, its officers and agencies/instrumentalities of the State to complete the exercise for regularization of the services of eligible employees within four months of the receipt/production of copy of this order, without being influenced by the fact that the application, writ petition or appeal filed by any such employee may have been dismissed by the Tribunal or High Court or this Court. Since some of the appeals decided by this order relate to part time employees, we direct that similar exercise be undertaken in their cases and completed within four months keeping in view the conditions enumerated in G.O.(P) No.112 dated 23.7.1997. 8. In view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled for regularization of his services as soon as he had completed five (5) years of service on 02-01-1991 (Services of the petitioner were terminated with effect from 24-10-1991). 9. Therefore, respondents are directed to consider regularization of services of the petitioner in the cadre of typist with effect from 25-11-1993 notionally, and he may be extended with notional increments from that date till the date of regularization of his services and put on regular time scale. 10. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ C.V. RAMULU, J August 17, 2010. NOTE: Dispatch the order by Monday. (B/O) PV