IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 23626 of 2007 Between: K.Veerachary S/o.Chandraiah office of the Mandal Revenue officer, Pangal Mandal ,Mahabubnagar District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Mahabubnagar District at Mahabubnagar 2 The Mandal Revenue officer (Tahsildar) Pangal Mandal, Mahabubnagar District 3 The Asst.Treasury officer, Sub Treasury office, Wanaparthy,Mahabubnagar 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 a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or writs order or direction to call for the records pertaining to the Adverse order dated 13.3.2007 passed in MA.No.3213 of 2006 in OA.No.5926 of 2005 on the file of Hon`ble AP Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and quash the same by further directing the respondents herein to pay minimum time scale to the petitioner herein including arrears due to him award costs and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.V.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No.23626 of 2007 ORDER: (per Smt. T.Meena Kumari,J) The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or writs, order or direction to call for the records pertaining to the order dated 13.3.2007 passed in M.A. No. 3213 of 2006 in O.A. No. 5926 of 2005 on the file of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and to quash the same. He also sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to pay the minimum time scale to the petitioner herein, including arrears due to him, award costs and pass such other orders or further orders. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner herein was appointed as copyist on 25.5.1995 on temporary basis. While so, through order dated 31.3.1990 the respondents have terminated the services of the petitioner. Questioning the same, he filed O.A. No. 3442 of 1990 before the Tribunal. In pursuance of the orders passed by the Tribunal in the said O.A., the respondents have inducted him into service and he is continuing as such till date. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he has completed more than two decades of service, the respondents have not considered his case for regularization. He, therefore, filed O.A. No. 5926 of 2005 seeking regualrisation of his services. The Tribunal, through order dated 4.10.2005 while admitting the said O.A. granted interim directions to the respondents to continue the petitioner in the post of Copyist on temporary basis. However, when the petitioner was not paid wages, he filed M.A. No. 3213 of 2006 before the Tribunal seeking interim direction to the respondents to pay wages to him. The Tribunal, through order dated 17.10.2006, directed the respondents to continue the applicant in service by paying salaries to him pending disposal of the O.A. and when the said order was not implemented, the petitioner filed C.A. No. 132 of 2007 before the Tribunal. Subsequently, the Tribunal through orders dated 13.3.2007, modified the order dated 17.10.2006 and directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization. The grievance of the petitioner is that pursuant to this order, the respondents have not been paying salaries to him on the ground that the earlier order dated 17.10.2006 has been withdrawn. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Admittedly, the Tribunal through the impugned order dated 13.3.2007 modified its earlier order dated 4.10.2005 and directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of G.O. Ms. No.112, dated 23.1.1997 and to pass appropriate orders pending further orders in the O.A. and it did not pass any adverse order against the petitioner. In the circumstances, we do not find any valid ground to entertain this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the same is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, we direct the Tribunal to dispose of the main O.A. itself, namely, O.A. No. 5926 of 2005, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already disposed of. . The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ___________________ T. MEENA KUMARI,J DATE: 3rd March, 2008 __________________ G. CHANDRAIAH,J pnb