IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25689 of 2008 Between: M.A. Saleem S/o. M.A. Raheem, Narayanpet, Mahaboobnagar District R/o. D.No. 2-5-4, Narayanpet, Mahaboobnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Secretary, A.P. College Service Commission, Gaganvihar, 1st Floor, M.J. Road, Hyderabad. 3 The District Vocational Education Officer, Mahabubnagar. 4 The Principal , Government Junior College, Narayanpet, Mahaboobnagar District. 5 The Director of Intermediate Education, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ of Certiorari calling for records pertaining to orders of the Hon'ble A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad dt. 26-7-2007 passed in C.A.No. 247/07 in MA No. 3120/2008 in CA No. 350/2001 in OA no. 7626/2000 and set aside the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.ASADULLA SHAREEF Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per GM, J) This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari challenging the order dated 26.07.2007 passed in C.A.No.247 of 2007 in M.A.No.3120 of 2006 in C.A.No.350 of 2001 in O.A.No.7626 of 2000 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘Tribunal’). The petitioner has been working as Part-time lecturer in 4th respondent college for the past 15 years. He filed O.A.No.7626 of 2000 before the Tribunal, seeking regularization of his services as lecturer, in which, an interim order dated 29.11.2000 was granted directing the petitioner to file representation to the authorities concerned seeking regularization of his services within one week from the date of that order. Even though the petitioner submitted representation dated 04.12.2000 to the respondents, no orders have been passed thereon. So, he filed C.A.No.350 of 2001 in O.A.No.7626 of 2000 and the same was closed along with O.A.No.7626 of 2000 on 22.11.2004, and the said order reads as under: “This is a matter concerning regularization of services of part time lecturers. Since similar such matters are pending before the Hon’ble High Court, at this stage, no orders can be passed in this O.A. After deciding the matter by the Hon’ble High Court, the applicant has to seek necessary remedy. If the applicant is already continuing as Part time lecturer by the date of filing of the O.A., he may be continued in that post. Accordingly, the O.A. is disposed of. C.A.No.350 of 2001 is closed in view of the disposal of the main O.A. No costs. Again, the petitioner filed M.A.No.3120 of 2006 in O.A.No.7626 of 2000 seeking to implement the order dated 22.11.2004 passed in O.A.No.7626 of 2000 with C.A.No.350 of 2001 and consequently, to direct the 5th respondent to pay the minimum wages on par with the other part time lecturers and the same was disposed of by an order dated, 18.12.2006, and the relevant portion reads as under: ‘Hence, the Tribunal doth hereby adjudicate upon the M.A., directing the concerned respondents 1 to 5 to implement forthwith, without fail, and without giving any scope for further complaint from the applicant, the orders, as claimed in the M.A. and set forth in para-1 supra,” For non-implementation of the above said order, the writ petitioner filed C.A.No.247 of 2007. The Tribunal, having observed that the order, dated 22.11.2004, passed in O.A.No.7626 of 2000 has been complied with by the respondents, held that no further enquiry be conducted and accordingly, closed the said C.A. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services-I. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that there is a clear direction in M.A.No.3120 of 2006, to implement the order dated 22.11.2004 passed in O.A.No.7626 of 2000, and as against it, no appeal is filed by the respondents, and therefore, the said order dated 22.11.2004 has attained finality. He further contended that on account of non-implementation of the said orders, the petitioner is not getting minimum pay on par with the other part time lecturers i.e., he is being paid only Rs.3,600/-per month, whereas other part time lecturers are being paid Rs.10,000/-per month. Hence, he prays to allow the writ petition. Admittedly, the order passed in M.A.No.3120 of 2006, dated 18.12.2006, has not been challenged by the respondents, therefore, the said order has attained finality. Here, it is pertinent to note that the Tribunal closed C.A.No.247 of 2007, which was filed seeking to implement the orders passed in M.A.No.3120 of 2006 in the said O.A., with an observation that no further enquiry is required to be conducted into the matter. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is set aside. The Tribunal is further directed to adjudicate upon the issue involved in C.A.No.247 of 2007 on merits and pass appropriate orders afresh, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ________________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Date:01.12.2008 Note: CC by three days. Copy to the Registrar, APAT, Hyderabad. (Bo) sj