IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 17035 of 2003 Between: N.Suresh Pandey S/o. N.Balaji Pandey R/o.Kanala Village Nandyal Mandal Kurnool District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman Rayalaseema Grameena Bank Head Office Cuddapah 2 The Area Manager Rayalaseema Grameena Bank Srinivas Nagar Vijay Complex Nandyal, Kurnool District 3 Syndicate Bank rep. by its Branch Manager Nandayl , Kurnool District 4 The Manager, Rayalaseema grameena Bank, Chagalamarry Branch, Nandyal Mandal Kurnool District .....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 or order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent orally instructing the petitioner not to attend the duties is illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India, consequently direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner and pass such other order or orders as it may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.V.AJAYAKUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1, 3 &4: MR.K.SRINIVASA MURTHY The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.17035 OF 2003 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in orally instructing the petitioner not to attend the duties, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently sought for a direction to the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner. The petitioner was initially appointed as a temporary Messenger on 02.12.1991 and subsequently he was shifted to the 4th respondent bank from November 2001 and ever since he has been discharging his duties without any blemish. Though his services are required to be regularized, for some reason or the other, his services could not be regularized. Further when the 4th respondent authorities asked him not to attend the duties, he approached this Court and filed the present writ petition. While admitting this writ petition, this Court, on 14.08.2003, granted interim order in WPMP No.21156 of 2003 directing the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner. Subsequently, the said interim order was made absolute by order dated 06.12.2004. In view of the said interim order passed by this Court, the petitioner is continuing in service as temporary Messenger. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that there are permanent vacancies of the posts of Messenger-cum-Sweeper and since the petitioner was appointed as early as in the year 1991 and has been working as such on temporary basis for the last 17 years, the case of the petitioner may be considered against the permanent vacancy. Under the circumstances, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as Messenger-cum-Sweeper on permanent basis in the existing vacancy. No costs. ____________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 24-07-2009 Gsn.