IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO.25609 OF 2000 DATED:25.11.2010 Between: U. Anitha and others … Petitioners And Sri Venkateswara University Tirupathi, Chittoor District Rep. by its Registrar and others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO.25609 OF 2000 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus to declare action of the respondents in not paying regular time scale to the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and consequently to direct the respondents to pay regular time scale to the petitioners in the posts in which they are working and discharging similar duties on par with the regular employees. According to petitioners, who are eight in number, the petitioners 1 and 3 were appointed as Computer Assistants, the petitioner No.4 was appointed as Office Assistant and petitioner Nos.5 to 8 were appointed as Office Assistant, by the respondent – University, on daily wage/NMR basis. Some of them were appointed in 1997 and the others were appointed in 1999. In spite of availability of regular vacancies and though the petitioners have completed more than one- and-a-half years of service, they are not put on time scale applicable. According to petitioners, they are attending to identical duties as that of regular employees in the respective categories and hence they are also entitled for minimum time scale of pay, as applicable to the regular employees. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it is stated that petitioner No.4 is working under the control of fourth respondent only. The remaining petitioners are working on daily wage basis with the University, and their services were engaged purely on daily wage basis to cope up with the workload. Their services were hired for a period of 89 days only and thereafter they were relieved, and their services were again being hired, whenever necessary, for another further period of 89 days. The petitioners’ service will not be counted as university service. The wages are paid on daily wage rate basis. Therefore, they cannot be considered as employees of the University and their service cannot be treated as continuous service. It is further stated that the contention of the petitioners that they are discharging same and identical duties as that of regular employees, is not correct. The duties allotted to the petitioners are not similar to that of the regular employees of the University. The services of the persons working on hire basis cannot be compared with the work and the scale of pay of the employees already appointed to the regular posts, by following the State Government Rules i.e., issuing of open advertisement, following the rule of reservation, etc. If any vacant post arises in the university, it is to be filled with the approval of the State Government only. As such, the university cannot take the services of the petitioners on regular time scale without concurrence of the State Government. The petitioners are daily wage employees and they were not appointed under regulations of the university and they cannot be called as employees of the university. There is no necessity of going into all the details. It is suffice to notice that as on the date of filing of the writ petition, admittedly, petitioners are daily wage employees and have had put in at the most one year service, on the date of filing of the writ petition. It is not their case that they were appointed after being either sponsored by the employment exchange or they have applied pursuant to any notification issued by the university. Therefore, unless and until regular posts are available and sanction is made thereto by the Government, the University cannot take the services of the petitioners on regular time scale without concurrence of the State Government. However, since the petitioners have completed more than ten years of service as on today, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners for absorption in any existing or future vacancies and till such time, their services may be utilized on the same terms and conditions, as of today. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________________ (C.V. RAMULU, J) 25.11.2010 bnr