HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.11123 of 1998 MONDAY, THE 12th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009 Between: Smt Viquarunnissa ….PETITIONER(S) and The Government of A.P., rep. by its Secretary to Government, Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …RESPONDENT(S) HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR W.P.No.11123 of 1998 ORDER: (PER SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH) In this petition, the petitioner, who was working as part-time lecturer, seeks to declare, by way of mandamus, the action of the 1st respondent in fixing the cut off date as 25.11.1993 for regularization of her services and the proceedings of the 2nd respondent i.e. the Director of Collegiate Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, vide Rc.No.3567/PC.III.2/97-9 dated 10.03.1998 whereunder the case of the petitioner was declared not eligible for regularization as per G.O.Ms.No.328 Education (CE-III) Department dated 15.10.1997 as illegal and unconstitutional and to direct the respondents to regularize her services as Lecturer in Arabic in the 3rd respondent college with all consequential benefits. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education. It is the case of the petitioner that she is working as part-time Lecturer in Arabic in the 3rd respondent College since 01.08.1991 and is continuing as such. It is her contention that prior to issuing G.O.Ms.No.328 referred to above, the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.221 dated 23.03.1995 issued comprehensive orders for regularization of the part-time lecturers and according to that G.O. she is eligible to be regularized as Lecturer. While so, her case for regularization of service was rejected by the 2nd respondent as per the proceedings referred to above on the ground that she did not put in the required service as laid down under Clause 9.5 of G.O.Ms.No.328 dated 15.10.1997. Admittedly, the Government has issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.328 Education (CE-III) Department dated 15.10.1997 notifying the criteria for regularization of service. As per Clause 9.5 thereof, only those who have put in a service of 3 academic years as on 30.07.1991 or 5 academic years as on 25.11.1993, as the case may be, and also continuing in service on the date of issue of those orders are eligible for regularization. The Apex Court in A.MANJULA BHASHINI AND OTHERS VS. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, A.P. WOMEN’S COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION LTD. AND ANOTHER[1] upheld the validity of the Andhra Pradesh (Regulation of Appointments to Public Services and Rationalization of Staff Pattern and Pay Structure) Act, 1994 (for short `the 1994 Act') by Amendment Act Nos.3 and 27 of 1998, so also the cut off date as fixed for continuance of their service subject to the required period of service as on 25.11.1993. In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court and the reasons notified in the impugned order and the averments made in the counter affidavit, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order as the claim of the petitioner does not fit into the required criteria, and therefore the petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought and the writ petition is devoid of merits and hence is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed. The interim order granted earlier stands vacated. No order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J ___________________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR,J 12th OCTOBER 2009 KPR/CVRK [1] 2009(5) ALD 58 (SC)