THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No. 23371 of 2007 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as Khalasi (since re-designated as Shramik) in the A.P.S.R.T.C., on 02-12-1992. Claiming the relief of regularization, with effect from the date of initial appointment, petitioner and others approached this Court by filing W.P.No.1851 of 1997. The writ petition was allowed directing that, the respondents shall regularize the services of the concerned employees, with effect from the date of their initial appointment. The judgment was confirmed by a Division Bench, in Writ Appeal No.850 of 1999, dated 16-12-2003. Consequently, the 3rd respondent issued office order dated 15-07- 2004, regularizing the services of the petitioner and 10 others, with effect from the dates of their initial appointment, on daily wage basis. This, however, was subject to the result of SLP filed against the judgment of this Court. It is stated that the SLP was disposed of by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, on 24-08-2007, with an observation that the questions raised by the Corporation are left open. The grievance of the petitioner is that though several candidates, who are juniors to him in the category of Shramik, were promoted, he is not extended the said benefit. A counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents, admitting the facts, referred to above. However, it is pleaded that in view of the observations made by the Supreme Court, the petitioner cannot claim the benefit of regularization, with effect from the date of his initial appointment. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The efforts made by the petitioner, to get the services regularized, with effect from the date of his initial appointment, on daily wage basis; materialized in the form of a judgment in the writ petition and thereafter, in the writ appeal, and the consequential order was also passed on 15-07-2004. The order dated 24-08-2007, passed by the Supreme Court, does not have the effect of setting aside the judgment of this Court in the writ petition, or writ appeal. The question was left open, to be decided in other cases. At the most, it may give rise to a situation, wherein the judgment rendered in the writ petition and writ appeal, referred to above, cannot be treated as binding. That, however, does not mean that the petitioner is not entitled for the benefit of regularization of services, with effect from the date of his initial appointment. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed, and the respondents are directed to examine the case of the petitioner for promotion with effect from the date on which his services were regularized. It is, however, made clear that the promotion of the petitioner shall be only prospective in effect, and without any monetary benefit, for the period anterior to the date of promotion. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.22-07-2008. KO