THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 2310 of 2006 Between: G.Mythili, d/o G.B.BV.Shastri, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER AND The Northern Power Distribution company of A.P.Ltd., rep., by its Chairman And Managing Director and two others. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.A.R.Seshagiri Rao Counsel for the Respondent No.: Mr.P.R.Balrami Reddy. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.2310 OF 2006 ORDER : The petitioner herein joined the services of the erstwhile A.P. State Electricity Board on 3.8.1982 and she worked in the establishment of the 1st respondent till 31.8.1989 on payment of daily wages at the rate of Rs.15/-, Rs.20/- and Rs.25/- for different periods. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in terminating the petitioner’s services orally w.e.f. 1.9.1989 she filed W.P.No.12559 of 1989. By order dated 24.03.1992 the said writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s claim for absorption as a Typist on regular basis. Since the said order was not complied with, the petitioner approached the Conciliation Officer – Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Warangal -, who after examining the petitioner’s claim by letter dated 18.7.1990 requested the Member Secretary of the A.P. State Electricity Board to consider the petitioner’s representation for absorption as regular Typist in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. In spite of the same, the petitioner’s services were not regularized and therefore the petitioner filed W.P.No.3577 of 1993. The said writ petition was allowed with costs by this Court by order dated 19.11.1997 with a direction to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner as Typist forthwith and extend all pecuniary and other benefits flowing from such regularization of her services within a period of two weeks. Against the said order the respondents preferred W.A.No.1427 of 1997. A Division Bench of this Court disposed of the said Writ Appeal by judgment dated 26.11.2004 holding as under : “Therefore, we have no doubt in our mind that the learned single Judge was not right in directing the regularization of the petitioner. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case where we have found that the petitioner has been serving the department, either because of the orders of the department or of the Court’s interventions, for more than 15 years now, therefore we direct that the writ petitioner be considered for a post, if available, for which she is qualified. With these modifications the writ appeal is disposed of. No costs.” Pursuant thereto, the petitioner made a representation dated 23.12.2004 requesting the 2nd respondent herein - Chief General Manager (HRD) , Northern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited to consider her candidature for appointment in any suitable vacancy. By proceedings dated 22.2.2005 the 2nd respondent rejected the petitioner’s request stating that there were no suitable vacancies in their Department. Thereafter, the petitioner made another representation to the Chairman and Managing Director of the Northern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited with a request to consider her candidate for appointment in any existing vacancy. However, there was no response. Hence, this writ petition seeking a declaration that the action of the 2nd respondent in rejecting the petitioner’s representation vide his proceedings dated 22.2.2005 as arbitrary and illegal. It is alleged by the petitioner that as on September, 2005 tough there were 12 vacancies of Typists apart from 2 vacancies of Junior Stenos against which she was qualified to be appointed, the respondents had filled up the said vacancies with contract workers on daily wages only to get over the orders of this Court in W.A.No.1427 of 1997. While directing notice to the respondents on, this Court having taken note of the fact that the petitioner was being continued on casual basis or on job-typing basis as on that date, by order dated 14.2.2006 directed that the same shall be continued until further orders. Thereafter, by order dated 14.02.2008 in WPMP.No.2851 of 2008 the respondents were directed to continue the petitioner as Typist in the respondent Organization. There was again another direction on 24.9.2008 in WPMP.No.25720 of 2008 to consider engaging the petitioner as typist or in any other capacity as per her educational qualifications sympathetically in view of the fact that she served the Department for more than 15 years and pass appropriate orders within a period of three weeks and communicate the same to the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner made a representation dated 25.03.2009 requesting the respondents to consider her candidature for appointment as a Typist or in any other post. Having considered the same, the 2nd respondent by letter dated 30.07.2009 informed the writ petitioner that on verification of her educational qualifications and age (48 years), it was found that there were no suitable posts for accommodating her against the sanctioned post and that apart there was a Government ban on filling-up the existing vacant posts in any cadre except those posts permitted by the Government through paper notification against the sanctioned posts of any category. However the petitioner was assured that her case would be examined for consideration for employment through outsourcing agency on contract basis based on skills and qualification. The stand taken in the above said letter has also been reiterated in the counter-affidavit dated 15.7.2009 filed on behalf of the respondents. Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and having regard to the specific plea of the respondents that no suitable posts were available for accommodating the petitioner as per the directions of the Division Bench in W.A.No.1427 of 1997, I am unable to hold that the impugned order dated 22.2.2005 is arbitrary or illegal on any ground whatsoever. It is relevant to note that the Division Bench while disposing of W.A.No.1427 of 1997 directed to consider the candidature of the writ petitioner for a post, if available, for which she was qualified. Subsequently there was also similar direction in WPMP.No.25720 of 2008 dated 24.09.2008. In compliance with the same, 2nd respondent passed a speaking order informing the petitioner that in view of the ban imposed by the State Government, the vacant posts in any cadre cannot be filled up except those posts permitted by the Government. Nothing could be placed before this Court by the petitioner to show that the stand taken by the respondents that no suitable posts are available to accommodate her is factually incorrect. In the circumstances, it is not necessary to keep this writ petition pending any longer. Accordingly, granting leave and liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 30.07.2009, if so advised, by working out the appropriate remedy available under law, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 20.08.2009 gbs