THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION No. 8530 of 1998 DATED: 25-04-2007 Between: V.Chinna Subbaiah …Petitioner and The Secretary to Government, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development Dept., Govt. of A.P., Hyderabad and others …Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No. 8530 of 1998 Oral order: In substance, the petitioner seeks regularization of services in the post of a Sweeper with all consequential benefits including notional seniority, attendant monetary benefits etc. According to the petitioner, he was appointed as a Sweeper in Renigunta Gram Panchayat on 1-4-1984 in a post sanctioned by the 3rd respondent. Petitioner was continued uninterrupted since the date of his initial appointment. Petitioner claims to be qualified for appointment as a Sweeper even on the date of his initial appointment and to be fully qualified and eligible for absorption in the post. Initially, the petitioner was put on daily wages payable monthly and thereafter on consolidated monthly pay. No benefit of time scale of pay was extended to the petitioner. The petitioner further asserts that the 3rd respondent communicated a provisional seniority list of employees working on temporary basis in various Gram Panchayats in Chittoor District on 20- 8-1996 and invited objections. After receiving objections, the 3rd respondent sent proposals to the 1st respondent through the 2nd respondent recommending regularization of the petitioner’s service as a Sweeper. As the 1st respondent failed to pass any orders on the proposals of the 3rd respondent and he is suffering without grant of time scale of pay and without regularization of service, the petitioner has filed this writ petition, particularly as he is paid meager fixed pay of Rs.1000/- per month. The petitioner does not assert that his initial appointment as Sweeper on temporary basis in 1983 was pursuant to a notification of the post or after any process of recruitment. The post of a Sweeper in a Gram Panchayat is a public office governed by the constitutional discipline ordained under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. It is not a private empire at which people could be employed on the whims and fancies of individuals. Public employment can only be made on the basis of known qualifications, a process of notification of the vacancy so as to afford opportunity to all qualified to apply for such public office and after a process of selection or recruitment, whereby all applicants could be rationally considered for such public office. Clandestine appointment without following such discipline of law relating to public employment would not confer any entitlement to regularization or permanence in a public office. Such appointment could be illegal and therefore would not justify any claim for regularization of services. This is the law reiterated by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Umadevi v. Union of India[1]. Though no counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents despite the 10th anniversary of the writ petition approaching, in view of the averments in the writ petition and the law declared in Umadevi, this court discerns no case for grant of relief. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J 25-04-2007 GRR [1] (2006) 4 SCC 1