THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23796 of 2010 ORDER: Petitioner No.1 is the union of workers and petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are contract labour engaged by the respondents. It is stated that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 were put at work by the labour contractor on his emerging as successful bidder. According to them, though another agency has emerged as a labour contractor for the subsequent period, they are entitled to be engaged by that contractor also. Reliance is placed upon a judgment of this Court i n K.Ravinder and others Vs. A.P. General Corporation Limited, Hyderabad[1]. Heard the leaned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. There is no dispute that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 were engaged as contract labour by M/s. Swathi S.C. Labour Contract Mutually Aided Cooperative Society Limited for the year 2008- 2009. For the subsequent year, M/s. Sai Krishna Constructions is said to have engaged the petitioners. Thereafter, a different agency is emerged as successful labour contractor. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 insist that they alone must be required to be engaged by the subsequent contractor also. Such a proposition cannot be accepted. It is the prerogative of the successful labour contractor to engage persons of his choice to the agency concerned, subject to the persons holding the qualifications. The contract labour who are engaged by one agency cannot insist that they alone must be engaged by the contractor for the subsequent period also. The judgment relied upon by the petitioners relates to the regularisation of services of the contract labour and no proposition as indicated above was laid down therein. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:27.09.2010. kdl [1] 2000 (6) ALD 56