IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.No.24249 of 2003 Between: P.Venkateshwar Raju and others … Petitioners And A.P.State Housing Corporation Limited And another. … Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WPMP. No.3012 of 2010 And W.P. No.24249 of 2003 ORDER: The petitioners have filed WPMP.No.3012 of 2010 seeking to expedite hearing of the writ petition. In the affidavit, filed in support of this petition, it is stated that though this Court had passed interim direction on 18.11.2003 to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization, if the services of their juniors have already been regularized, within a period of two months from the date of the order, the same has not been complied with, so far. Therefore, while ordering this expedite petition, I am of the view that the main writ petition itself can be disposed of. The writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the petitioners as per G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994 or as per G.O.Ms.No.182, dated 13.11.1991 of Housing (RM) Department in the cadre of Work Inspector, while regularizing their juniors, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners on par with their juniors from the date when they were regularized with all consequential benefits. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that they have been appointed as Work Inspectors in the respondent’s Corporation and have been working continuously for the past several years. Without regularizing the services of the petitioners, their juniors have been given regular scale attached to the post of Work Inspector. Therefore, earlier, they, along with other similarly situated persons, filed W.P. No.21705 of 1995 and the same was disposed of on 16.06.1998 directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners with effect from the date on which they have completed five years of continuous service subject to the fulfillment of the prescribed eligibility as per G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. Thereafter, the petitioners have made a representation to the Managing Director requesting him to regularize their services as per G.O.Ms.No.212 but the authorities have without proper consideration, the case of the petitioners was rejected vide proceedings dated 21.10.1998 stating that there were no clear vacancies to consider the case of the petitioners and also because of introduction of bill on 25.07.1998 amending Section 7 of A.P. (Regularisation of Appointment to Public Services and Retionalisation of Staff Pay Structure) Act, 1974 and also insertion of new Section 7(A). It is also submitted that thereafter as per Memo.No.A4/4271//98, dated 04.10.1999, the petitioners were directed to be paid the consolidated wages equivalent to minimum emoluments in the cadre subject to their status as NMRs. It is categorically submitted that the Work Inspectors, who are juniors to the petitioner in various other districts, have also been regularized. In the Visakhapatnam, the Work Inspectors have been regularized as per G.O.Ms.No.182, which was issued as per the directions of this Court in W.A. No.38 of 1989 dated 02.04.1991. It is submitted that though the petitioners have made several representations pointing out that their juniors have been regularized and requesting that their cases may also be considered for regularization, the same was not considered though they are eligible as per G.O.Ms.No.212 and also as per G.O.Ms.No.182 for regularization. It is specifically submitted that the petitioners have completed five years of service even as on 25.11.1993 as stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.212 and Section 7 of the Act 2/1994 and the amended Section 7(A) of 1998 will not come in any way for regularization. Hence, the present writ petition. Counter has been filed by the 1st respondent, inter alia, stating that initially the petitioners were engaged as NMR Work Inspectors and they were not in the rolls of the Corporation and there was a break of service in respect of all the petitioners. Further, the petitioners were appointed as Work Inspectors on consolidated pay or Rs.700/600 per month vide proceedings dated 05.05.1992 of District Collector/Executive Director, A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited, Nalgonda District, treating their services afresh with effect from 01.03.1989 in respect of petitioners 2 and 3 and in respect of the 1st petitioner with effect from 01.12.1989. Inasmuch as, the petitioners have not fulfilled the conditions stipulated continuous service of five years as on 05.11.1993 their cases for regularization of services was not considered in terms of G.O.Ms. No.212, dated 22.04.1994 but however, extended the benefit of consolidated wages equivalent to minimum emoluments in the cadre of non-technical Work Inspectors on NMR status only, as per the instructions issued in Memo dated 04.10.1999. In so far as the averment of the petitioners that the services of their juniors have been regularized, it is submitted in the counter that certain NMR Work Inspectors, who were appointed subsequent to the petitioners, were regularized as Work Inspectors in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994 as they have completed continuous service of five years as on 25.11.1993. It is also submitted in the counter that earlier the petitioners have filed W.P. No.W.P.No.21705 of 1995 for regularization of their services and this Court disposed of the same directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners with effect from the date on which they have completed five years of continuous service subject to fulfilling the prescribed eligibility conditions as per G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. In pursuance of the said directions, the request of the petitioners for regularization of their services in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994, was considered and rejected, as they have not fulfilled the conditions stipulated in the said G.O. This Court on 18.11.2003 in WPMP.NO.30526 of 2003 passed interim direction to the respondents to consider regularization of the services of the petitioners, if the services of their juniors have already been regularized, within a period of two months from the date of the order. From a perusal of the record, the main grievance of the petitioners is that their services have not been regularized while regularizing the services of their juniors, for which, the respondents have submitted that the petitioners have not completed their five years of continuous service. It is not in dispute that the petitioners 1 to 3 have appointed as Work Inspectors in the respondents Corporation on 01.01.1987, 20.12.1986 and 15.12.1986, respectively. It is specifically submitted in the counter that the petitioners were appointed as Work Inspectors on consolidated pay vide proceedings dated 05.05.1992 of the District Collector/Executive Director, A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited, Nalgonda, District, treating their services afresh with effect from 01.12.1989 in respect of the 1st petitioner and with effect from 01.03.1989 in respect of the petitioners 2 and 3. Further, it is also submitted that pursuant to the direction given by this Court in W.P.No.21705 of 1995, the request of the petitioners was considered and rejected on the ground that they have not fulfilled the prescribed eligibility conditions as per the G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994, i.e., the petitioners have not completed five years of continuous service. From the above, it is obvious that there was a clear direction from this Court to regularize the services of the petitioners with effect from the date on which they have completed five years of continuous service. If, as per the averment made in the counter, even if there was a break in the service of the petitioners, the services of the petitioners were treated afresh with effect from 01.03.1989, the respondents ought to have regularized their services as and when their continuous five years of service have been completed, as per the G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for regularization of their services, if the services of their juniors have already been regularized, if they are eligible for such regularization in accordance with law in force, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the WPMP. No.3012 of 2010 is ordered and the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH Date: 12-04-2010 LSK