HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI W.P.No.5452 OF 2001 ORDER This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with I.D.No.14 of 1997, dated 28.9.2000 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same by holding it as arbitrary and illegal and consequently to direct the 1st respondent to regularize the services of the petitioners from the date of their initial appointment including arrears of pay. Heard Sri P.Govinda Rajulu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri B.Mayur Reddy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation. It is the case of the petitioners that they were initially appointed as Conductors/Drivers in the respondent- Corporation on 4.1.1988, on casual basis and they have completed 240 days of service. As per the policy of the respondent-Corporation, they are entitled for regularization on completion of 240 days of service. Their services were regularized nearly after one year three months vide proceedings dated 1.3.1989. When their request to regularize their services from the date of their initial appointment was rejected, the petitioners have raised Industrial Dispute before 2 the Conciliation Officer. When the talks were failed, the Conciliation Officer has referred the dispute to the appropriate Government and the appropriate Government referred the dispute to the Labour Court to adjudicate the dispute vide G.O.Rt.No.314, dated 10.2.1997. The Tribunal had adjudicated the matter and passed NIL Award vide order dated 28.09.2000. Challenging the said Award passed by the Labour Court, the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to an identical case in A.Rajeswar vs. Managing Director, APSRT & Ors (W.P.No.24363 of 1998, dated 1.9.1998), wherein this Court has considered and adjudicated the issue as to whether the casual workers are entitled for regularization on completion of 240 days and allowed the writ petition by following the judgment reported in APSRTC v. P.T.Rao1, wherein Division Bench of this Court declared that the workmen are entitled for regularization. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation contends that the cases of the petitioners were considered for regularization as and when vacancies arose i.e., on 1.3.1989 and therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for regularization from the date of their initial appointment as there were no vacancies as on that date. 1 1998(2) ALT 47 3 Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the considered view that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment in A.Rajeswar vs. Managing Director, APSRT & Ors (W.P.No.24363 of 1998, dated 1.9.1998) and therefore, this writ petition can be disposed of in terms of the said judgment. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment rendered in W.P.No.24363, dated 1.9.1998, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners to regularize their services from the date of their initial appointment without any back wages and other monetary benefits. However, the date of their initial appointment should be considered for the purpose of fixation of pay and pensionary benefits. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI 15th June, 2018 rkk 4