IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 9699 of 1999 Between: B. Shanthi D/o. Late B. Sanjanna Working in Divisional Engineer, Operation, A.P. Transco Distribution Corporation Ltd., Cuddapah, resident of 2/857, Nagaraju Peta, Sri Hari Rao Street, Cuddapah. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 A.P.Transco Distribution Corporation Ltd. rep. by its Managing Director/Secretary, Vidyut Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 2 The Chief Engineer, Operation, A.P. Transco Distribution Corporation Ltd. Cuddapah Circle, Cuddapah. 3 The Superintending Engineer, Operation, A.P. Transco Distribution Corporation Ltd. Cuddapah Circle, Cuddapah. 4 The Divisional Engineer, Operation, A.P. Transco Distribution Corporation Ltd. Cuddapah Division, Cuddapah. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 a Writ order or direction, especially one in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent in not regularising the petitioner services as Regular Typist as illegal, arbitrary violative of Article 14, 19, 21 of constitution of India and issue consequential direction to the Respondents to regularise the petitioner services forthwith by giving consequential benefits and other service advantages and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.DHONDAY RAM MANE Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.9699 of 1999 ORDER: The relief sought for in the his writ petition is for a direction to regularize the services of the petitioner as a Typist. The petitioner contends that she joined as a Typist in the technical section in the office of the Divisional Engineer (Operation) A.P. Transco in the vacant post of Typist and that she has been continuing ever since, without any break, in a regular post and that she was being paid salary ranging between Rs.1200/- to Rs.1500/- per month. She would contend that, though she was fully eligible, for a long time her services have not been regularized. She would contend that this Court, in W.P.No.3577 of 1993 dated 19.11.1997, had directed the respondents to absorb and regularize her services and, when the matter was carried in appeal, the Division Bench, in W.A.1427 of 1997, directed the respondent to pay the minimum time scale of pay admissible for regular Typist pending disposal of the writ appeal. In their counter affidavit, the respondents would state that, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court earlier in W.P.27139 of 1997, the petitioner was interviewed on 3.4.1998 and was intimated accordingly by order dated 8.9.1998. They would state that, as per the records available, she working in the office of the Divisional Engineer (Operations), Kadapa as a job Typist engaged through Minerva Typewriting Institute, that vide Board Memo dated 28.8.1997 job typists were not eligible to be considered for appointment against 50% vacancies in the initial recruitment cadre as per B.P.Ms.No.36 dated 18.5.1997. While admitting that there was one vacancy in the post of Typist, in the office of the Divisional Engineer, respondents would state that they were getting day to day typing work done through Minerva Typewriting Institute, that the petitioner was neither directly nor indirectly appointed by APTRANSCO, that the mere fact that she was working as an employee of Minerva Typewriting Institute in the office of the Divisional Engineer did not entitle her to claim that she should be absorbed as a typist in the respondent – Board. Reference is made to the rules wherein the qualification prescribed for appointment to the post of Typist is SSC and Typewriting English Higher whereas the petitioner, as per the records produced by her at the time of interview, did not possess the prescribed qualification and had, in fact, passed Typewriting English lower only. Since the respondents deny the very existence of an employer- employee relationship and contend that they had entrusted typing work to a Typewriting Institute which had engaged the petitioner’s services, the question of the petitioner being absorbed into the service of the respondent does not arise. Reliance placed by the petitioner on the judgment of this Court, in W.P.No.3577 of 1993 dated 19.11.1997, is misplaced in as much as it was held that regularization can only be of persons who have been irregularly appointed. The question whether persons engaged through an outside agency on a job-contract basis could be extended the benefit of regularization of their services with the A.P. TRANSCO did not arise for consideration in the said judgment. In any event, as has been held by the Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi[1], no right of regularization enures in favour of daily wage NMR employees on account of their having worked as such for certain duration. In the case on hand the petitioner was not even engaged by the respondent – Corporation on daily wages or as an NMR and, in fact, she was employed by Minerva Typewriting Institute through whom the 4th respondent was getting its job work done. Viewed from any angle, the relief sought for cannot be granted. The writ petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. __________ 28-2-2008 asp [1] 2006(4) SCC 1