IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 8495 of 2004 Between: M. Laxmipathi, S/o Kanakaiah, O/o General Manager, Telecom District, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited, Rep. by the Director General, New Delhi. 2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom, Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited, Hyderabad - 500001. 3 The General Manager, Karimnagar District, Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited, Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh. .....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 Writ of mandamus and to declare the action of respondents in not regularizing the services of petitioner as arbitrary and discriminatory and unconstitutional and consequently to direct the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioner and to provide him opportunity to complete for absorption into Lineman cadre with all consequential benefits Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.NAVEEN RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner as arbitrary and discriminatory and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioner and to provide him opportunity to compete for absorption into Lineman cadre with all consequential benefits. The case of the petitioner is that he has been working as Casual Mazdoor in A.P. Telecom from 11-02-1986 onwards in Karimnagar district and at various places. As things stood thus, the respondents instead of continuing the petitioner in service and conferring the beneﬁts available to him, sought to terminate him from service on the ground that he submitted bogus work days of having worked in Railway Electriﬁcation Project at the time of joining in Karimnagar District. Litigation ensued leading to several rounds before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and thereafter he ﬁled W.P. No.20708 of 1999 aggrieved by a portion of the order of the learned Tribunal made in O.A. No.1211 of 1998. This Court initially passed interim orders directing continuation of his services and the batch of cases were disposed of by judgment dated 22-11-2000, including the writ petition ﬁled by the petitioner, directing the respondents to engage the petitioners and to regularise their services by formulating a scheme. But so far the services of the petitioner is not regularised. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the material on record. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the similar circumstances in respect of similarly situated employees ﬁled W.P. No.24783 of 2004 and the same was disposed of by this Court on 07-06-2008 directing the respondents therein to consider the case of the petitioners in terms of Scheme dated 07-11-1989 i.e. “Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme, for temporary status and regularization, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. He also submits that the facts and circumstances of the case on hand also similar to the facts and circumstances of the case of W.P. No.24783 of 2004. Therefore, this writ petition can also be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of Scheme dated 07-11-1989. It is also submitted that pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court in W.P. No.20708 of 1999 the petitioner is continuing in service. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as sought for in the writ petition. He also submits that there is no afresh scheme formulated by the respondent-Management for considering the case of the petitioner. Admittedly the petitioner was initially engaged as a casual mazdoor on 11-02-1986 onwards and thereafter his services were sought to be terminated on the ground that he produced bogus work days of having worked in Railway Electriﬁcation Project. Questioning the said termination the petitioner ﬁled O.A. No.1211 of 1998 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and the same is partly allowed. Aggrieved by a portion of the order of the learned Tribunal he ﬁled W.P. No.20708 of 1998 wherein this Court initially passed interim orders directing continuation of his services. Eventually, the Division Bench of this Court disposed of, including the writ petition ﬁled by the petitioner, a batch of W.P. No.23456 of 1999. The operative portion of the batch of writ petitions reads as under. “Taking into consideration the fact that these petitioners have worked as casual labourers (mazdur) under the respondent- management for such a long period ranging from 1985-86 till date, though pursuant to the interim direction granted by this Court, and many of them might have already crossed the age of eligibility and without taking into consideration the genuiness or otherwise of the certificates produced by them, it is now ordered that the respondent- management shall engage these petitioners afresh as casual labourers from this day and pay them the wages and other emoluments payable to the casual labourers from this day. Regarding regularization of these petitioners, it shall depend upon the future exigency, any scheme to be launched by the management, the suitability of the workmen, etc.” Further, from a perusal of the judgment dated 07-06-2008 passed in W.P. No.24783 of 2004, it is obvious that this Court directed the respondents therein to consider the case of the petitioners therein in terms of Scheme dated 07-11-1989 i.e. “Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme, for temporary status and regularization, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, as the petitioner is continuing in service as a casual mazdoor without conformity of temporary status and as there is no dispute with regard to the Scheme dated 07-11- 1989, I am of the considered view that the case of the petitioner is to be considered following the judgment dated 07-06-2008 passed in W.P. No.24783 of 2004. In the result, accordingly, following the order dated 07-06-2008 made in W.P. No.24783 of 2004, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of Scheme dated 07-11-1989 i.e. “Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme, for temporary status and regularization, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this orders. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH Date: 25-08-2008 LSK ORDER: This writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, and discriminatory, and consequently direct the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioner and to provide him an opportunity to compete for absorption into Lineman cadre, with all consequential benefits. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he acquires the status of a casual labourer and entitled to the beneﬁt of the scheme contemplated in letter, dated 07-11- 1989, his case was not considered for regularization. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned standing counsel for BSNL appearing for the respondents submits that the subject matter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in W.P. No.24783 of 2004 dated 17.06.2008. In view of the same, following the said judgment, this writ petition is disposed of, with the following direction. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner, in terms of the Scheme, dated 07-11-1989 i.e. “Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation) Scheme, for temporary status and regularization, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH Date: 25-08-2008 LSK