HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO. 1056 OF 2011 Between: The Government of A.P. represented by its Principal Secretary and two others ………….Appellants AND Smt. P. Sailaja Kumari and one another ………….Respondents JUDGMENT: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Appeal is preferred by the respondents in the Writ Petition, challenging the direction issued by the learned Single Judge while allowing the Writ Petition instituted by the first respondent herein. The first respondent-writ petitioner was selected as a Junior Lecturer in the second respondent College herein and appointed as such on 21.9.1988 and she has been working as part time junior lecturer since then without any break. While so, the Government of Andhra Pradesh formulated a scheme for regularization of part-time lecturers under G.O.Ms.No. 302, Education, dated 23.8.1991. The first respondent-petitioner also placed reliance on G.O.Ms.No. 328, Education, dated 15.10.1997, which dealt with the issue of regularization of services of part time lecturers. The main grievance of the first respondent- petitioner is that her case was not considered for regularization in spite of proposals being submitted by the second respondent-College. The stand taken by the appellants herein is that the proposal was resubmitted after the expiry of the period prescribed for effecting regularization under G.O.Ms.No. 328 dated 15.10.1997 and therefore, the case of the first respondent could not be considered. The first respondent, being fully qualified and eligible for seeking regularisation as per the policy of the Government cannot be deprived of her lawful right because of the arbitrary action of the appellants in construing such proposal to be beyond time. Hence, the learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition directing the appellants herein to consider the proposal submitted by the second respondent-College under letter dated 9.1.1998 in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 328, Education dated 15.10.1998 and pass necessary orders for regularization of the services of the first respondent as a Junior Lecturer, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. Therefore, we see no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge warranting our interference. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ________________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J DATE: 15.12.2011 KA ... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies.