Dismissed

Upputholla Nasaramma at Bussa Nasaramma v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC24 Jul 2024WP/10021/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amaravati bench dismissed a writ petition filed by a sweeper seeking writ of mandamus for allotment of work and salary. The court held that the petitioner did not establish a master-servant relationship and could not claim benefits under the cited Government Order.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed with no costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

Upputholla Nasaramma at Bussa… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 10021 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Upputholla Nasaramma @ Bussa Nasaramma, W/o. Bussa^Immaniyelu, Aged about 44 years, Occ. Sweeper, O/o.Urban Health^{Centre,Macherla,} Guntur district, R/o. Door No. 14-2-549, Backside Gowda Colony, 8th Ward, Yanadi Colony, Macherla, Palnadu District, erstwhile^{Gunturdistrict.}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Health, Medical and Family Welfare, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District,^{AndhraPradesh.}

¶12

Union of India, Department of Health, Medical and Family^Welfare Rep., by its Secretary, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi.

¶13

The Pay and Accounts Officer, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi.

¶14

The Commissioner of Health and Family Welfare, 5th floor, APIIC Towers, Mangalagiri, Guntur district.

¶15

The District Medical and Health Officer, Guntur, Guntur district.

¶16

The District Collector, Guntur, Guntur district.

¶17

4 7. The Chairperson, Andhra Pradesh Corporation for^Outsourced Services, 2nd Floor, NTR Administrative Block, P.N.B.S., Vijayawada, Krishna district.

¶18

Apollo Hospitals Enterprise Limited, 0/o.9th floor, Krishe Sapphire Building, HiTech City Main Road, Madhapur, Hyderabad^-500081. Telangana State.

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly^one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring the action on the part of the official respondents in not considering the petitioner's representation,^dated04-04- 2022 and also not taking steps for allotting works to the petitioner in her Sweeper post in her Urban Primary Health Center in^{consonancewiththe} G.O.Ms.No.43 / 2016, dated 28-04-2016 as illegal, arbitrary, unjustice and contrary to Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the officials respondents to treat the service of the petitioner are under the administrative control of the official respondents and pay previous salary and regular salary by taking^{intoconsiderationof} the service rendered by the petitioner for more than 15 years in the respective Urban Primary Health Centers

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶22

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the official respondents to pay salary @ Rs. 12,000/- from 16th October, 2016 to February, 2017 to the petitioner which is payable by either 1st respondent or 8th respondent, pending disposal^{ofWritPetition}

¶23

NO: 2 OF 2023

¶24

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstatedin} the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 1®\ 3'^'^ to 6*^ & 8*^ respondents to pay the remaining salary to the petitioner from 01-03-2017 to 31-08-2021 i.e., Rs.2,000/- per month of 53 months total outcome Rs.1,06,000/- as per the G.O.Ms.No.151 / 2016, dated 08-08-2016, pending disposal of Writ Petition

¶25

lA NO: 3 OF 2023

¶26

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstatedin} the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 1st, 3rd to 6th respondents to pay an amount of Rs.12,000/- to the petitioner towards monthly salary from 01-09-2021 to till now as per the G.O.Ms.No.151 / 2016, dated 08-08-2016, pending disposal^{ofWritPetition}

¶27

lA NO: 4 OF 2023

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstatedin} the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 1st, 3rd to 6th respondents to allot work to the petitioner in her Sweeper post in her Urban Primary Health Center in^{consonancewiththe} G.O.Ms.No.43 / 2016, dated 28-04-2016, pending disposal^{ofWritPetition}

¶29

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶30

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstatedin} the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be-pieased to grant leave to the respondents to^{filecounteraffidavitin} WP.No. 10021 of 2023 duly condoning the delay

¶31

Counsel for the Petitioner :SRI. S.ASHOK KUMAR

¶32

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES IV

¶33

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶34

APHC010191192023

¶35

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶36

[3331]

¶37

THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶38

PRESENT

¶39

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI

¶40

WRIT PETITION NO: 10021/2023

¶41

Between:

¶42

Upputholla Nasaramma @ Bussa Nasaramma ...PETITIONER

¶43

AND

¶44

The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT{S)

¶45

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶46

1.S.ASHOK KUMAR

¶47

Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES IV

¶48

The Court made the following:

¶49

:: ORDER ::

¶50

The above wnt petition is filed seeking the following^relief;

¶51

“to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly^one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action on the part of the official respondents in not considering the petitioner’s representation, dated 04-04-2022 and also not taking steps for allotting^workstothe petitioner in her Sweeper post in her Urban Primary^HealthCenter in consonance with the G.O.Ms.No.43 / 2016 dated 28-04-2016 as illegal, arbitrary, injustice and contrary to Articles 14, 19 (1)(g) and 21 of the

¶52

SRS.J W.P.No.10021

¶53

Page 2 of 7

¶54

Constitution of India and consequently direct the officials^{respondentsto} treat the service of the petitioner are under the Administrative^controlof the official respondents and pay previous salary and^{regularsalaryby} taking into consideration of the service rendered by^{thepetitionerfor} more than 15 years in the respective Urban Primary^{HealthCentersand} pass such other order or orders ...”

¶55

The averments in brief, as per the affidavit, is that^{thepetitioner} was 1 appointed as Sweeper in Urban Primary Health Center, Macherla, Guntur District by Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) in the year, 2006. Subsequently, respondent No.1 issued G.O.Ms.No.43 Health,^Medical,and Family Welfare (E2) Department, dated 28.04.2016, dispensing with the service of NGOs and to continue the services 'under the control of the Commissioner of Health and Family Welfare. Later the^{Governmentinvited} tenders from the service providers for operationalizing^E-UPHCsand M/s Appollo Enterprises Private Limited i.e. respondent^{No.8,wasidentifiedasthe} continued as

¶56

service provider for establishing e-UPHCs. The. petitioner Sweeper under the control of respondent No.8 till 31.08.2021. Despite issuance of G.O.Ms.No.151 dated 08.08.2016, increasing^{thesalariesofthe} Sweepers to Rs.12,000/- per month w.e.f September,^{2016respondentNo.8} paid Rs. 10,000/- per month only. The contract between^respondents 1 and 8 was completed on 31.08.2021 and therefore, respondent^{No.8dispensedwith} the petitioner’s services without issuing any notice. Petitioner made representation dated 04.04.2022 to respondents 2 and^{4toallocateworkto}

¶57

^Page 3 of 7

¶58

SRS,J W.P,No.10021 of 2023

¶59

her and to pay previous pending and regular salary^{from01.09.2021} till date. However, no action was taken by them. Hence, the writ petition.

¶60

A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of respondent No.4. It was contended, inter alia, that the Government of Andhra Pradesh initiated A.P. Urban Slum Health Care Project in the year, 2000 to provide Primary Health Care to the urban poor with special focus on urban slums. Urban Health centers’ were established under NGOs on a yearly contractual basis. The Government provided funds to NGOs to operate and maintain Urban Health Centers. The NGOs were evaluated annually and based on their performance, the c'ontract, with NGOs, was renewed till 2016. The petitioner was engaged by NGOs in the Urban Health Clinics temporarily. The petitibner was not engaged by the respondents in the regular sanctioned posts by following recruitment rules, rules of reservation and merit,^etc.

¶61

b. Subsequently, Government has taken policy decision to upgrade all Urban Health Centers into Electronic Urban Primary Health Centers. Accordingly, G.O.Ms.No.43, HM & FW(E2) Dept., dated 28.04.2016 was issued and tenders were called for whereby M/s. Apollo Hospitals Enterprise Ltd., Hyderabad and M/s. e-Vaidya Dhanush Healthcare LLP, Hyderabad emerged as successful bidders. As per the agreement dated 18.08.2016, the service provider shall run eUPHC as per standard operating procedure. Petitioner joined with the service provider. The service provider operated eUPHC with medical officers and other staff till August,^2021.

¶62

Page 4 of 7

¶63

SRS,J W.P.No.10021 of.

¶64

c. In the year, 2020, Government took a decision and issued G.O.Rt.No.686, HM & FW (D1) Dept., dt. 09.11.2020, for establishing 560 Urban Primary Health Centers in the State, to improve the Primary Health Care, delivery in Urban Areas. The government also sanctioned human resources i.e. medical officers, nurses, paramedical, and supporting staff posts for each urban PHC. Permission was accorded to fill up staff by following recruitment rules. All the staff worked in UHCs and eUPHCs were engaged by NGOs and service providers only. There is no relation of master and servants between the petitioner and the respondents.

¶65

d. Petitioner never worked in the Department of Government and no appointment order was issued to the petitioner. Salaries were released to the personnel working under NGOs during the transition period of shifting services from NGOs to service providers. In view of, the hardship of the personnel working through NGOs., G.O.Ms.No.151, Fin (HR-1, Pig. & Policy) Dept., dated 08.08.2016 was issued revising remuneration payable to the outsourced services identified through a third party agency and outsourcing of functionaries should be only against the sanctioned posts. Hence, the terms of said G.O. do-not apply to the petitioner. Eventually, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.

¶66

Heard Sri S. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner^and Sri Y.B. Ramesh, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-IV for the respondents 1 and 4 to 6.

¶67

0 (’age 5 of 7

¶68

SRSJ W.P.No.10021 of 2023

¶69

Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the contentions as per the averments of the writ affidavit and learned Assistant Government Pleader fo. Services-IV reiterated the contentions as per the counter affidavit. 6. The petitioner herein prayed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to allow her to work in the post of Sweeper ini Urban Primary Center in terms of G.O.Ms.No.43 dated 28.04.2016. 7. In pursuance of a policy decision taken by the State Government to upgrade all Urban Health Centers into Electronic Urban Primary Health Centers, respondent No.1 issued G.O.Ms.No.43 dispensing with NGOs from operating the existing urban centers for a certain period. Subsequently as mentioned in the counter affidavit, Urban Health Centers were upgraded as eUPHCs, and agreements were entered into with M/s. Apollo Hospitals Enterprise Ltd., Hyderabad and M/s. e-Vaidya Dhanush Healthcare LLP, Hyderabad. The petitioner was continued as a sweeper under the service providers. Thereafter, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.686 dated 09.11.2020 for establishment of Urban Primary Health Centers, and also sanctioned human resources. Recruitment was done by following recruitment rules!

¶70

Except placing reliance upon G.O.Ms.No.43, the petitioner did not even file her appointment letter. Material placed before this Court does not establish the relationship of master and employee between the petitioner and

¶71

SRS,J W.P.No.10021 o\

¶72

Page 6 of 7

¶73

facie show that petitioner was respondents 1 to 6. The material would prime and later the service provider continued engaged by NGOs in a health center her services.

¶74

In the absence of an employee and employer relationship between the is not maintainable. and respondents 1 to 6, the writ petition, itself, petitioner . The relief cannot claim benefit under G.O. referred to supra The petitioner of this Court, cannot be sought in the writ petition, in the considered opinion indicated supra staff were recruited by following recruitment granted In fact, as rules. 10. Given the above discussion, this court does not find^{anymeritsinthe} writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand^closed.

¶75

SD/-G. HELA NAIDU //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR AGr SECTION OFFICER

¶76

¶77

OneCCto SRI. S.ASHOK KUMAR Advocate [OPUC]

¶78

Two CCS to GP FOR SERVICES IV ,High Court Of Andhra^Pradesh. [OUT]

¶79

Three CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:25/07/2024

ORDER

WP.No.10021 of 2023

DISMISSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Upputholla Nasaramma at Bussa Nasaramma v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Upputholla Nasaramma at Bussa Nasaramma v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Y v v Vara Prasad Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kondreddi Ramakrihnamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P Lokesh Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Botcha Kamala Kumari, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B. Savarappa, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M Samuel Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh