IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 16618 of 2004 Between: 1 P.Bhaskar S/o. Ilaiah University College (PG) Kakatiya University, Warangal. 2 Ch.Ravikumar S/o. Venkatasubbaiah University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . . Khammam District. 3 M.Mohsim Pasha S/o. Abdul ali Kakatiya University, Khammam District. 4 T.Ravi S/o. T. Satyanarayana Rao Kakatiya University, Kothagudem Khammam District. 5 K.Srujana D/o. K.Venkateshwara Rao University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . . Khammam District. 6 M.Mrinalini reena D/o. M.r.Sikhamani University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . Khammam District. 7 K.Ramanadham S/o.Maisaiah University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . Khammam District. 8 B.Jagadeesh Kumar S/o. Venkatnarayana University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . Khammam District. 9 D.Raghubabu S/o. Appa Rao University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . .. . Khammam District. 10 G.Lingaiah S/o. Nagaiah University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . . . . Khammam District. 11 T.Rajashekar S/o.Saibaba University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . . Khammam District. 12 C.R.V.Rathan Kumar S/o. Manohar Raj University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . Khammam District. 13 S.Srinivas S/o. Durgaiah University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . Khammam District. 14 K.Prabhakar S/o.Thirupalu University College of Engineeing Kakatiya University, Kothagudem, . . Khammam District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. by Principal Secretary Education Department, Secretariat Hyderabad. 2 Kakatiya University rep. by its Registrar, Warangal. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents in not regularising the services of the petitioners in the regular vacancy and not paying the regular scale of pay attached to the post of lecturer on par with other lecturers working in the University as arbitrary, illegal in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and to issue a consequential direction to the respondents to regularise vacancies with effect from the date of initial appointment and pay the scale of pay attached to the post of lecturer on par with other lecturers with all consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.PRABHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No1.: GP FOR EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.2 : Mr.B.Narayan Reddy. The Court at the stage of admision made the following : ORDER: The petitioners are working as Contract Lecturers in the 2nd respondent-University. They mentioned in Para-2 of their affidavit, the educational qualifications acquired by them. They are contending that some of the petitioners have been working Part Time/Contract Lecturers since 1997. The petitioners further contend that the 2nd respondent did not undertake the recruitment to the sanctioned posts and no recruitments are taking place. The Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.221, dated 20-6-1995 regularising the services of Part Time Lecturers working in Government Degree Colleges, who have completed five years of service. Similarly, the State Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.362 dated 7-10-1996 regularising the services of Part Time Lecturers in private aided Colleges. But, the 1st respondent knowing fully well that the recruitment for the posts of lecturers in various Universities in the State could not made for the last 12 years for various reasons, did not choose to frame any scheme regarding the regularization of the services of Part Time/Contract Lecturers. The petitioners further contend that the 2nd respondent is taking steps to appoint some other lecturers on contract basis in the place of the petitioners. If the petitioners are kept out of service by appointing others on contract basis, it would be unjust and unreasonable. Therefore, they approached this Court through this Writ Petition seeking to declare that the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioners in the regular vacancies, as illegal and arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. In a similar case, a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.6469 of 2001 and batch rendered a judgment on 21st October, 2003 wherein the Division Bench observed as follows: “Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we consider it appropriate to direct the University to permit the Writ petitioners to participate in the process of selection and consider their cases for regular appointments, provided they possess the requisite qualifications after relaxing the age of those writ petitioners who have crossed the age limit for seeking appointment as Assistant Professors/Lecturers. The University shall take an appropriate decision in the matter and accordingly relax the age limit and shall bear in mind the same while issuing the notification inviting applications from the eligible candidates for selection and appointment as Assistant Professors/Lecturers in various departments. We make it clear that the writ petitioners will have to face the competition and shall have to compete with others for their selection and appointment as Assistant Professors/Lecturers. The University while issuing the notification shall take all the relevant factors into consideration including the roster points”. Since the petitioners are claiming that they are working on contract basis, those petitioners who have the requisite qualifications are entitled to be considered by the 2nd respondent and permit them to participate in the process of selection and consider their cases for regular appointments, provided they possess the requisite qualifications after relaxing the age limit to those Writ Petitioners who have crossed the age limit for seeking appointment as Assistant Professor/Lecturers. The University shall take appropriate decision in the matter and accordingly relax the age limit and shall bear in mind the same while issuing notification, inviting applications from the eligible candidates for selection and appointment as Assistant Professor and lecturers in various departments. It is made clear that the eligible Writ Petitioners shall face competition and shall compete others for their selection and appointment as Assistant Professor and lecturers. The 2nd respondent shall also take into consideration all the relevant factors including roster points while issuing the notification. In the light of the above observations, the petitioners are not entitled to be regularized automatically without undergoing the above process of appointment. In the event of the 2nd respondent engaging the persons on contract basis till they make the regular appointments, the petitioners shall not be replaced with the persons of same qualifications, unless the 2nd respondent takes any action against such candidates under any other Rules. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ------------------------- Dr. G.Yethirajulu,J 16th September,2004. KM ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal Secretary Government of Andhra Pradesh, Education Department, Secretariat Hyderabad. 2 Registrar, Kakatiya University ,Warangal. 3. 2CCs to G.P. Higher Education, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad . . (OUT) 4. 2CD copies THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 16618 of 2004 16th September, 2004.