THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.18160 OF 2000 DATED 21ST OCTOBER, 2011 BETWEEN K.Ganga Suvarna …Petitioner And Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupathi, Rep. by its Registrar. …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.18160 OF 2000 ORDER: The petitioner herein earlier filed Writ Petition No.1369 of 1998 before this Court assailing the action of Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati, in terminating her services and sought a consequential direction to the University to consider her case for appointment on permanent basis in any of its Departments. By order dated 24.01.2000, a learned Judge of this Court disposed of the writ petition taking note of the earlier order dated 21.07.1994 passed in W.P.No.14517 of 1993 directing the University to consider the petitioner’s case for appointment in a suitable post as per her eligibility and the applicable rules. The learned Judge observed that no material was placed before him to show that any attempt had been made by the University to comply with the aforestated direction and that it had to be presumed that the petitioner’s continuation as a Computer Operator was not ‘need based’ and amounted to continuous employment. The learned Judge therefore concluded that as the University had not passed any orders pursuant to the earlier orders of the Court, it would be proper to give another opportunity to the University to consider the petitioner’s case for being appointed either as a Junior Assistant where the services of a Junior Assistant are required in a Computer Section or as a Computer Operator. This exercise was directed to be completed within a period of four weeks. Acting upon the aforestated direction, the University issued Memo dated 07.03.2000 stating that the petitioner’s case would be considered in future if any posts of Junior Assistant in the Computer Section or Computer Operator are filled up. Assailing this communication, the petitioner filed the present case. A consequential direction was sought to the University to consider her case and appoint her in one of the vacant Junior Assistant posts in the University or in any other suitable post on a permanent footing and on a regular scale of pay. By interim order dated 26.09.2000, this Court directed the University to continue the petitioner in service. It is not the case of the respondent University that no posts/ vacancies are available in its service. According to it, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued instructions under letter dated 01.01.1996 not to make appointments by direct recruitment to any category of posts without its approval. This was cited as the reason for not considering the petitioner’s case for regular appointment despite the orders of this Court. Sri Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondent University, stated that since 07.03.2000, when the impugned Memo was issued to the petitioner, the respondent University has only undertaken appointments on compassionate grounds and no direct recruitments have been made. A list of 52 of such appointments is produced. The learned counsel for the petitioner however placed reliance on G.O.Ms.No.151, Higher Education (U.E.I) Department, dated 19.10.2005, whereby the Government of Andhra Pradesh accorded permission for regularizing the services of 46 contingent employees working in the respondent University. Pertinent to note, 7 Junior Assistants’ services were also regularized. It is unfortunate that despite orders being passed by this Court as long back as on 21.07.1994 (W.P.No.14517 of 1993) and 24.01.2000 (W.P.No.1369 of 1998), the petitioner is still continuing in the service of the respondent University without permanence. As stated supra, it is not the case of the University that it does not need her services or that there is no vacancy/post available. Further, the impugned Memo dated 07.03.2000 does not even indicate that the respondent University addressed the Government for necessary sanction/permission for appointing the petitioner on a regular basis pursuant to the Court orders. Having suffered two orders, the least that was expected of the respondent University was that it would address the Government in this regard. Having failed to do so, it is not open to the respondent University to conveniently pass on the blame to the Government for not considering the petitioner’s case. In any event, G.O.Ms.No.151 dated 19.10.2005 demonstrates that the Government of Andhra Pradesh is also not against making regular appointments in the University. In so far as the posts of Junior Assistants are concerned, seven contingent employees working as Junior Assistants were regularized in the service of the respondent University under the aforestated G.O. There is no reason as to why similar consideration should not be extended to the petitioner who has been rendering long and continuous service in the respondent University since the year 1990. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed setting aside the Memo dated 07.03.2000 passed by the respondent University. The respondent University is directed to address the Government of Andhra Pradesh for necessary permission to implement the orders of this Court in W.P.Nos14517 of 1993 and 1369 of 1998 and consider the case of the petitioner for regular appointment in the post of Junior Assistant or any other suitable post as per her eligibility, duly relaxing the age qualification, within three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 21ST OCTOBER, 2011 PGS/VGSR