1. THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO 2. AND 3. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 4. WRIT APPEAL Nos.241, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 345, 346, 348, 349, 355, 356, 357, 358, 360, 361, 619, 1172 of 2002, W.P.No.21461 of 1998 and W.P.No.22461 of 2001 DATE:10.08.2009 Between: K. Venkateswar and others … Appellants And M/s. Indian Air Lines, Southern region, Hyderabad, represented by its Senior Manager. … Respondent THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL Nos.241, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 345, 346, 348, 349, 355, 356, 357, 358, 360, 361, 619, 1172 of 2002, W.P.No.21461 of 1998 and W.P.No.22461 of 2001 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Prakash Rao) Since a common question arises for consideration in all these writ appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. The brief facts of the cases are that the appellants claim to be casual employees working with the respondent corporation for a long time in various capacities like drivers, telephone operators, typists, helpers, peons, saffiwalas, etc. They filed a batch of writ petitions before this court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking declaration that they are entitled for regularization of their services and all the writ petitions were dismissed. Their grievance is that with a view to avoid granting permanent benefit of regularization of their services, the respondent corporation has chosen to adopt the method of engaging casuals as permanent casuals and started giving artificial brakes. A learned Single Judge of this Court, after taking into consideration the submissions made on either side and also the fact that a specific scheme has been enunciated by the respondent corporation basing upon certain directions given by various High Courts, has approved the scheme and extracted the same in the common order dated 19.10.2001 in W.P.Nos.1116 of 2001 and batch. Further, having incorporated the said scheme coming into force by the respondent corporation, the learned Single Judge did not find favour with the appellants and dismissed the batch of writ petitions. After taking into consideration the submissions made by both the learned counsel and having gone through the material on record, the question that arises for consideration is whether the appellants are entitled for regularization of their services and it has to be decided by the respondent corporation on merits, since the respondent corporation has already framed a scheme for regularization of service of the persons similarly placed as the appellants, whereunder the appellants can also take a shelter seeking for regularization of their services. In view of the same, it would suffice in the interest of justice, if the respondent corporation is directed to consider the case of the appellants taking into account the seniority or such other qualifications in terms of the scheme enunciated by the respondent corporation and pass appropriate orders. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the decision shall be communicated to the appellants. If the appellants are aggrieved by the decision taken by the respondent corporation, it is open for them to move the Labour Court and seek appropriate decision by adducing necessary documentary and oral evidence. Subject to the above, all the writ appeals are disposed of. No costs. _________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J ________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 10th August, 2009. cbs THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL Nos.241, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338, 339, 340, 345, 346, 348, 349, 355, 356, 357, 358, 360, 361, 619, 1172 of 2002, W.P.No.21461 of 1998 and W.P.No.22461 of 2001 (Disposed of) 10th August, 2009 CBS