IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 328 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 16/11/2007 in WP NO : 6420 OF 2006 on the file of the High Court.) Between: 1 The General manager, Telecom District, BSNL, Vijayawada. 2 The Chief General Manager, Telecom, BSNL, Doorsanchar Bhawan, Nampally Station Road, Hyd. 3 the Chairman & manaing Director, BSNL, New Delhi. 4 The Executive Enginer, ( Electrical) BSNL, REnuka Complex, Chittugunta, Vijayawada. ..... APPELLANTS AND S. Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Augustaine, O/o. the S.D.E. Electrical, BSNL, Sub Division, Vijayawada. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellants : MS.P.SARADA Counsel for the Respondent : MR.K.VENKATESWARA RAO The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 328 of 2008 JUDGMENT : (Per Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Anil R. Dave) Being aggrieved by the judgment delivered in Writ Petition No.6420 of 2006 dated 16th November 2007, this appeal has been filed by the employer - BSNL. Respondent was appointed as a casual Mazdoor on 1st July 1979 when he had not attained the age of majority. When the question regarding regularization of his services came, his services were not regularized with effect from the date when he was initially appointed on the ground that he had not attained the age of majority at the time when he was appointed as a casual Mazdoor. His services were regularized from the date on which he had attained majority. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the appellants – employer, the aforesaid petition was filed, which has been allowed on the ground that similarly situated persons had filed Writ Petition No.22283 of 1997, which had been allowed by an order dated 23rd March 2004. Similarly situated casual Mazdoors were regularized in service from the dates on which they had been initially appointed though they had not attained majority at the time when they had been given initial appointment. We do not find any reason to disagree with the reasons recorded by this Court in the aforesaid judgment. Looking to the facts of the case, we are in agreement with the reasons recorded by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.6420 of 2006. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. _________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 31st March 2008 ___________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J ajr To S. Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Augustaine, O/o. the S.D.E. Electrical, BSNL, Sub Division, Vijayawada.