*THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY + Writ Petition No. 9027 of 2000 % Dated 20.08.2008 # D.Muni Raju. ….Petitioner $ The Commissioner of Social Welfare, Govt. of A.P., Telugu Samkshema Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad and others. ….Respondents ! Counsel for the petitioner : Sri V.Jagapathi ^ Counsel for respondent No.2 : Sri Vijaya Bhaskar < GIST: > HEAD NOTE: ? Cases referred: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9027 of 2000 Between: D.Muni Raju, S/o. Natarajan. S.V.University, R/o Tirupathi. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Social Welfare, Govt. of A.P., Telugu Samkshema Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 2 The Director, A.P.Study Circle, Masab Tank, Hyderabad. 3 The Director, Pre-Examination Training Centre for Weaker Sections, S.V.University, Tirupathi. 4 The Govt. of A.P., Rep. By Its Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....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, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings Roc.No.PETC/SVU/2000, dated 06/05/2000 and consequential order dated 11/05/2000, both issued by the 3rd Respondent as arbitrary discriminatory and contrary to law and consequently set aside the said proceedings and direct the respondents to regularise the petitioner's services from the date of his entry into service either in the post of Typist or in any other suitable post in the 3rd Respondent or in any of the Institutions under the control of the 1s Respondent with all consequential benefits and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.B.ADINARAYANA RAO The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9027 of 2000 ORDER: With a view to provide necessary facilities for the candidates belonging to Schedules Castes, Scheduled Tribes & Backward Classes, and to prepare candidates for I.A.S., I.P.S. and Group-I Service Examinations, the Social Welfare Department of the Government of Andhra Pradesh made arrangements for establishment of Pre- Examination Training Centers (PETCs). Accordingly, it issued G.O.Rt.No.364, dated 20.06.1986 directing that such PETCs be established at Waltire, Tirupati and Warangal. For better administration of these Centers, they were placed under the control of the respective Universities. Budget allocation of Rs.3.5 lakhs for each center was made. The centers, so established, were registered as Societies under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act and the Articles of Association, for administration thereof, were adopted. The petitioner was initially engaged as an Oﬃce Attender for a period of one month i.e., from 02.05.1988 to 02.06.1988 along with four others by the Center at Tirupati, 3rd respondent herein. Similar appointment orders are said to have been issued at several spells in the subsequent years. Ultimately, the 3rd respondent issued order, dated 09.04.1990, appointing the petitioner as Attender on consolidated pay of Rs.600/- per month, under the concerned scheme. Even while the petitioner was being continued as Attender, the 3rd respondent mooted the proposal of appointing him as a Typist, vide a resolution, dated 20.02.1997, subject to approval by the Social Welfare Department, 1st respondent herein. Proposals were rejected on the ground that a regular post of Typist is not sanctioned. The petitioner ﬁled W.P.No.21879 of 1995 with a prayer to regularise his services with eﬀect from 09.04.1990 and to pay salary in the scale of pay ﬁxed for that post. During the pendency of the writ petition, he ﬁled Miscellaneous Petitions challenging the orders refusing to approve his appointment as Typist. The writ petition was ultimately disposed of on 28.10.1999 directing that respondents 1 to 3 herein shall consider the case of the petitioner for regularization, in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 02.04.1994. In compliance with the said direction, the 3rd respondent issued proceedings, dated 06.05.2000, rejecting the case of the petitioner. It was observed that there is no clear vacancy of Typist in the Center and that the case of the petitioner does not ﬁt into G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 02.04.1994. A consequential order, dated 11.05.2000, was issued directing that the continuance of the petitioner shall be as per the existing norms. The said proceedings are challenged in this writ petition. The petitioner contends that this Court has recorded a clear ﬁnding to the eﬀect that there is permanent need for the post of Typist in the Center and that the case of the petitioner deserves to be considered in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212. He submits that the reasons furnished by the 3rd respondent in the impugned order are untenable. A contention is also advanced to the eﬀect that the 3rd respondent is not the competent authority, to deal with the matter. Separate counter aﬃdavits are ﬁled on behalf of respondents 1 and 4, on the one hand, and respondent No.2, on the other. They plead that neither the A.P. Study Circle, 2nd respondent herein, nor the Government of Andhra Pradesh have any direct control over or link with, the 3rd respondent Center. It is stated that while the Government has provided ﬁnancial aid, subject to certain limits, the 2nd respondent has extended the expert support for the Center. They also plead that there is no sanctioned post of Typist and the writ petition is not maintainable in law. Sri V.Jagapathi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the very structure of the 3rd respondent discloses that the 1st respondent has full ﬁnancial and administrative control over it and the 1st respondent ought to have considered the matter, in terms of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.21879 of 1995. He further submits that the 3rd respondent has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. It is also his case that this Court had made a speciﬁc observation that there is a permanent need for the post of Typist. Sri Vijaya Bhaskar, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that when there is no post of Typist in the Center, the question of regularizing the services of the petitioner does not arise. He further contends that the case of the petitioner does not ﬁt into G.O.Ms.No.212 read with Act 27 of 1998. The entry of the petitioner into the Center was as an Oﬃce Attender in the year 1988, for a period of one month. This was followed by similar arrangement for subsequent years up to the year 1990. An appointment, without any restriction as to period, but on a consolidated pay of Rs.600/- per month, was made on 09.04.1990. The petitioner ﬁled W.P.No.21879 of 1995 with the following prayer: “The High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction particularly a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner with eﬀect from 9-4-90 and pay the salary as per the scale of pay fixed in this regard.” Obviously, this is for regularization in the post of Attender, which, under the order, dated 09.04.1990, was on consolidated pay of Rs.600/- per month. The record does not disclose that this prayer was amended. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner appears to have acquired the qualiﬁcation of Type Writing and work was extracted from him as Typist. The attempt made by the competent authority of the Center to appoint the petitioner as Typist did not fructify, inasmuch as the 1 st respondent did not approve it. This Court took the subsequent developments also into account and ultimately, the writ petition was disposed of on 28.10.1999, directing that the case of the petitioner be considered under G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. Though reference was made to the post of Typist in the body of the judgment, the ﬁnal direction does not made it clear as to whether it is with reference to the post of Attender or the post of Typist. This question assumes signiﬁcance, in view of the fact that the prayer was only vis-à-vis the post of Attender. Be that as it may, the 2 nd respondent understood the order, to be the one with reference to the post of Typist, as canvassed by the petitioner himself. The following conditions, which are made part of G.O.Ms.No.212, were extracted in the order, dated 06.05.2000: 1. The persons appointed should possess the qualiﬁcations prescribed as per rules in force as on the date from which his/her services have to be regularized. 2. They should be within the age limits as on the date of appointment as NMR/daily wage employee. 3. The rule of reservation wherever, applicable will be followed and backlog will be set-off against future vacancies. 4. Sponsoring of candidates from Employment Exchange is relaxed. 5. Absorption shall be against clear vacancies of posts considered necessary to be continued as per work load excluding the vacancies already notiﬁed to the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission/District Selection Committee. 6. In the case of workcharged establishment, where there will be no clear vacancies, because of the fact that the expenditure on workcharged is in a ﬁxed percentage of P.S. charges and as soon as the work is over, the services of workcharged establishment will have to be terminated, they shall be adjusted in the other departments, District Oﬃcers provided there are clear vacancies of last Grade Service. It is evident that condition No.5 mandates that the absorption would be against a clear vacancy. Therefore, it becomes necessary to verify whether there existed a clear vacancy of Typist, in the 3rd respondent-Center. The sanction of a Center under G.O.Rt.No.364, by itself, did not stipulate any cadre, much less, its strength. Only a sum of Rs.3.5 lakhs was sanctioned for each Center. The Articles of Association for the Center are silent about the details of establishments. From the Minutes of the meeting of Coordinators of competitive examinations, dated 22.02.1986, furnished by the petitioner, it is evident that each center was to have the following arrangement: (i) Co-ordinator (ii) Typist (Part-time for one month) (iii) Oﬃce Attender (Part-time for one month) In the subsequent arrangement also, there is no substantial change vis-à-vis the post of Typist. Under these circumstances, it cannot be said that there was a clear vacancy of Typist in the Center. The petitioner contends that the 3rd respondent was not the competent authority to pass the impugned order. Even this contention is not tenable. The reason is that the petitioner himself recognized the 3rd respondent as competent authority and it was impleaded as respondent No.1 in W.P.No.21879 of 1995. Further, the Society, which had established the 3rd respondent- Center, had its own Articles of Association. Under Clause (9) thereof, the Secretary is conferred with the power, and endowed with the responsibility, of general administration of the center. At any rate, the speciﬁc direction, issued by this Court in the said writ petition, was to respondents 1 and 3 herein. The 1st respondent expressed its inability to deal with the matter, inasmuch as it did not have any administrative control. Naturally, the burden fell upon the 3rd respondent to comply with the directions issued by this Court. Further, in case, the impugned order was passed in violation of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.21879 of 1995, the petitioner ought to have complained the matter by way of ﬁling a Contempt Case. Viewed from any angle, this Court does not ﬁnd any basis to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 20.08.2008 Note: L.R.Copy to be marked. (B/o) JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RAGHU} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9027 of 2000 Date: 20.08.2008 JSU