IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 3822 of 2004 Between: M. Sudhakar S/o. Babaiah, Occu:attender-cum-electrician R/o.H.No.24-4-180, Darga Kazipet, Hanumakonda Mandal, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director, A.P.Womens Co-operative Finance Corporation Limited, Vengalraonagar, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 2 The Government of A.P. rep., by its Secretary, Women & Child Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The District Manager, Telugu Bala Mahila Pragati Pranganam, Madikonda, Warangal 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 "Writ of Mandamus" declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not implementing the G.O.Ms.No.49, dated 28.7.1998 to the petitioner is being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to implement the G.O.Ms.No.49, dated 28.7.1998 to the petitioner and from the date of completion of 5 years service and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.H.SATISH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1:Mrs. M. Vidyavathi. Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE The Court at the stage of admission made the following : ORAL ORDER: The petitioner is working as an attender-cum-electrician on temporary basis with the first respondent’s-corporation. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents fail to implement the G.O.Ms.No.49 dated 28-07-1998 in his case and failed to enhance his consolidated pay by 50%. He, therefore, approached this court seeking a direction to the respondents to implement the said G.O. The petitioner represents that he made a representation to the first respondent on 18-02-2004 and the first respondent did not pass any order on it. In the light of the circumstances explained by the petitioner, the first respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, and the recommendation of the third respondent dated 22-06-2000, regarding the enhancement of 50% of the consolidated pay which is said to be extended to other employees in terms of G.O.Ms.No.49 dated 28-07-1998, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ 03..08..2004. RNS/CCM To 1 The Managing Director, A.P.Womens Co-operative Finance Corporation Limited, Vengalraonagar, Ameerpet, Hyderabad. 2 The Secretary, Government of A.P., Women & Child Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The District Manager, Telugu Bala Mahila Pragati Pranganam, Madikonda, Warangal District. 4. Two CCs to Government Pleader for Social Welfare, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad.(O.U.T), 5. Two CDs.