Disposed

A.P. Grampanchayat Employees and v. The State of A.P.

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Apr 2023WP/8828/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition by directing respondents to continue petitioners in their Gram Panchayats via muster rolls, ruling that petitioners have been retained for sanitation and drinking water supply services as previously permitted by the Fourth Respondent.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to continue petitioners in Gram Panchayats by maintaining muster rolls.

A.P. Grampanchayat Employees and Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶2

Writ Petition No.8828 of 2015

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226

¶5

of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

¶6

“....to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the acts of the respondents in removing the names of the members of the petitioners society from the rolls of employment in their respective village Gram Panchayat records vide Circular ROC No.184/2014-B1 (PTS) dated 12.02.2015 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently quash G.O.Rt.No.551, PR & RD (Estt.- IV) Department, dated 27.03.1999.....”

¶7

The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner union is a registered union with registration No.A-2894 and it consists of 1222 members and all the members are contract workers in Panchayat Raj Department and all of them are working as Sanitary Workers, Sweepers, Pump Operators, Electricians, Tractor Drivers, Bill Collectors and Watchman etc.

¶8

While so, the 3^rd respondent had issued proceedings vide circular ROC.No.184/2014-B1, dated 12.02.2015 informing that a memo was issued by the Government in the year 1989 and as per the said memo, since there are shortage of permanent employees, contract employees can be appointed for sanitation and other works in Panchayat Raj Department with the permission of

¶9

¶10

District Panchayat Officer and the said proceedings also informed that the respondents issued G.O.Rt.No.551, dated 27.03.1999 informing that the contract employees in Gram Panchayats are employed through contract agencies and certain guidelines were given for calling tenders. Moreover, it was also informed that the names of the employees should not be mentioned in employee’s rolls and attendance should not be entered into the register.

¶11

The contention of the petitioner is that, the petitioner’s union is working for more than 20 years and if the said circular is implemented basing on the G.O.Rt.No.551, PR & RD (Estt.- IV) Department, dated 27.03.1999, they would lose all their benefits like ESI, Provident Fund etc., and also they will lose the opportunity of regularizing their services once and for all and they would be considered as fresh employees and all the service they put for the last 20 to 30 years would be wasted. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed this writ petition.

¶12

When the writ petition came up for admission on 02.04.2015, this Court made following observations:

¶13

“Heard learned counsel for the petitioner learned Government Pleader for Development and Panchayat Raj and Rural (Andhra Pradesh).

¶14

¶15

The petitioner is Andhra Pradesh Gram Panchayat Employees & Workers' Union. It sought for a writ of mandamus for declaring the action of the respondents in proposing to remove the names of the members of the petitioner association from the rolls of the employment in the respective gram panchayat records, pursuant to the circular instructions passed on 12.02.2015 by the 2nd respondent Commissioner of Panchayat Raj and Rural Development, as illegal.

¶16

Though a prayer couched in such broad language cannot be granted, inasmuch as who are all the members of the petitioner association in the respective gram panchayats will be extremely difficult to be identified, but nonetheless since the petitioner is a workers' union representing the lowly-paid sanitary workers spread over across various gram panchayats in the State and knowing that they get very meagre wages for their manual work, I consider that ends of justice would be more appropriately served by entertaining the Writ Petition and directing Respondents 1 and 2 to consider immediately giving general directions to all gram panchayats to retain the existing workers, who have been attending to sanitation and public health works in the respective gram panchayats, by setting apart at least 50% of the wards, if not more, so as to enable the lowly-paid sanitary workers to continue to get occupied and attend to the sanitation and public health works. That would enure to the benefit of the employees and will help them eak out their living honourably.

¶17

¶18

It is appropriate to notice that sanitation and public health work is one of the most prominent services that is required to be rendered by all the gram panchayats. If an association is formed, specifically comprising of local members, attending to the sanitation work in the past, or their wards or dependants as of now, even such associations should be encouraged to compete with the others to attend to the sanitation work in the respective units. This perhaps will ensure that locally available sanitary workers or their wards and dependant children will be able to continue to attend to the work and thus, try to make a living honourably within the surroundings of their living. Let appropriate action be taken in this regard before the end of this month, so that the gram panchayat concerned would give effect to the same.

¶19

Issue Notice before admission returnable in four weeks.

¶20

Post after four weeks.”

¶21

Thereafter, the 4^th respondent has filed a counter, wherein, it is submitted that, in pursuance of the observations made before this Court, permission was also accorded for all the 98 Gram Panchayats to engage the workers for supply of drinking water, sanitation and street lighting with payment of wages as per the rates fixed / approved previously by this office by maintaining of muster rolls. Hence, it is submitted that all the petitioners are

¶22

¶23

continuing as such in their respective Gram Panchayat as on today.

¶24

Recording the said submission, as the petitioners have been continued in their respective Gram Panchayats and are carrying out their works even as on today, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondents to continue the petitioners in the said Gram Panchayats by maintaining the muster rolls.

¶25

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶26

Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶27

13.04.2023 kbs

¶28

__________________________________ SMT. JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶29

¶30

208

¶31

THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE V. SUJATHA

¶32

(Disposed of)

¶33

Writ Petition No.8828 of 2015

¶34

Date: 13.04.2023

¶35

kbs

A.P. Grampanchayat Employees and v. The State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.P. Grampanchayat Employees and v. The State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Maruthi Marine Services, Vs The State of A.P.

Smt.Potnuri Sri Devi, Vs The Union of India

Pullela Sathya Ramalinga Sastry, S/o Subrahmanya Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Orsu Sreenivasa Rao Vs The State of Andha Pradesh

J. Srinivasulu S/o J. Kalaiah, Vs Syndicate Bank