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 : 16110 of 2003 Between: B. Rama Narasimhulu,S/o. B. Pamuleti R/o. Bukkapuram Village, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Chairman, Rayalaseema Grameena Bank, Head Office, Cuddapah. 2 The Area Manager Rayalaseema Grameena Bank, Srinivas Nagar, Vijay Complex, Nandyal, Kurnool Dist. 3 Syndicate Bank, rep by its Branch Manager Nandyal, Kurnool Dist. 4 The Manager, Rayaseema Grameena Bank, Thimmapuram, Mahanandi Mandal, Kurnool Dist. 5 The Manager Rayalaseema Grameena Bank, Mahanandi Extension Counter, Kurnool Dist. .....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 5th respondent orally instructing the petitioner not to attend the duties is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the circular No. 12/STF/03/95 dated 16-01-1995 issued by the respondent bank, 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 Nos.1, 2, 4 & 5: MR.K.SRINIVASA MURTHY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.16110 of 2003 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 5th respondent in orally instructing the petitioner not to attend the duties, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the Circular NO.12/STF/03/95 dated 16.01.1995 issued by the 1st respondent bank. A consequential direction was also sought to direct the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner. The petitioner was initially appointed as Messenger on temporary basis in the 5th respondent bank on 28.09.1994 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 5th 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 04.08.2003, granted interim order in WPMP No.19961 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 1994 and has been working as such on temporary basis for the last 15 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.