IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BIKSHAPATHY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 862 of 2004 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 18-3- 2003 in W.P.NO 4984 OF 1997 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1. Special Secretary to Sate Legislature Govt of AP AP.State Legislative Assembly Hyderabad 2. State of A.P.rep. by Spl.Secretary to Govt. Finance and planning (FW.PC.III)Department,Secretariat,Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 A.Sujatha W/o Vittal Reddy aged 29 years 22-1-405, Kalikabar Chadarghat, Hyderabad 2 Kum. Pratapgiri Madhavi (R2 is not a necessary party) .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellants:GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondent No.1: K.Ramakrishna Reddy Counsel for the Respondent No.2: None appeared The Court made the following : JUDGMENT (Per Sri G.Bikshapathy,J) 1. This Writ Appeal is filed by the Secretary, State Legislature challenging the order passed by the learned single Judge, in W.P.No.4984 of 1997, dated 18-03-2003 . 2. The matter relates to regularization of services of the employee. The learned single Judge disposed of the Writ Petition directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the case of regularization of her services in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22-04-1994, and pass appropriate orders thereon. However, in pursuance of the orders of the learned single Judge, the Secretary State Legislature passed office order in RT No.161/O.P./2004, dated24-03-2004 regularizing her services in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212. But now this Writ Appeal has been filed by the Government stating that G.O.Ms.No.212 is not applicable to the case of the respondent. 3 . A Division Bench of this Court directed the State Legislature to frame regularization scheme and consider the cases of such employees in accordance with law. Now it is brought to our notice by the learned Govt. Pleader that since the Government has issued G,.O.Ms.No.12, dated 27-04-2004 framing regularization scheme, consideration of the case of the respondent for regularization doers not arise under G.O.Ms.No.212 as the said G.O. is not applicable to the employees of the State Legislature. He further submits that even under G.O.Ms.No.12 the respondent will be eligible for regularization if the conditions laid down in the said G.O. are complied with. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant, however, submits that he has no objection if the services of the respondent are regularized under G.O.Ms.No.12 as was down under proceedings, dated 24-03- 2004. 5. After hearing both the learned counsel, we are of the considered view that the appellant shall pass revised orders regularizing the services of the respondent in terms of G.O.Ms.No.12, dated 27-04- 2004 as applicable to the respondent herein. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of directing the appellants to pass appropriate orders regularizing the services of the respondent in terms of G.O.Ms.No.12, dated 27-04-2004 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs. ----------------------- G.BIKSHAPATHY Dated::12-07-2004. Hsd ---------------------------------- B.SESHASAYANA REDDY DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To. 1. Special Secretary to Sate Legislature Govt of AP AP.State Legislative Assembly Hyderabad 2. State of A.P.rep. by Spl.Secretary to Govt. Finance and planning (FW.PC.III)Department,Secretariat,Hyderabad. 3.2 C.Cs to G.P. for Services II,HighCourt Buildings,Hyderabad (OUT) 4.2 C.Cs. to G.P. for Finance and Planning ,HighCourt Buildings,Hyderabad (OUT) 5.2 C.D. copies.