THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.10752 of 2003 BETWEEN: 1. Dalith Municipal Society Labour Contract Cooperative Society, Gandhinagar, Kasibuga, Warangal, rep. by its President Pulla Ramesh, and others. PETITIONERS And 1. The Municipal Corporation, Warangal, Warangal District rep. by its Commissioner, and another. RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Prattipati Venkateswarlu Counsel for the respondents: The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition has been filed challenging the notification dated 7.06.2003 issued by the 1st respondent, viz., the Municipal Corporation, Warangal, inviting applications for awarding labour contract for sanitation work in the municipal area contrary to the orders issued by the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.30 dated 18.06.2000 and the Municipal Tender Rules 1967, as illegal. The petitioners are registered societies under the A.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1964. The members of the petitioners-societies belong to Scheduled Caste community. In the normal course, the sanitation work would be entrusted by a tender process. However, the State Government vide G.O.Ms.No.30 dated 18.06.2000 considering the request of the sanitary workers unions for entrustment of works to the societies without such tender process, directed that a portion of the sanitation be entrusted to the societies formed by the sanitary workers unions without participating in the tender process. In as much as the 1st respondent has not adhered and entrusted the work to the petitioners’ societies, they have filed this writ petition for the aforesaid relief. This issue has been considered by this Court in W.P.Nos.7040 and 7279 of 2003 dated 28.04.2003. It was held therein that even though the said G.O. does not specifically mention 15% reservation, an obligation is cast on the municipality to reserve at least 15% of the work for entrustment to labour contract societies. It was also observed therein that it is always open to the municipality to entrust works beyond 15% also, if the municipality choose to do so. The view taken in the said judgment squarely covers the issue raised in this writ petition. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and the notification dated 7.06.2003 to the extent it is contrary to G.O.Ms.No.30, dated 18.06.2000 is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 24th March, 2011 Js.