Dismissed

The Commissioner v. D.Darshan

Telangana HC20 Sept 2005WP/13347/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a writ petition filed by the Commissioner of Rajendranagar Municipality challenging an Administrative Tribunal order. The Tribunal had directed the municipality to consider regularization claims of applicants. The court found the Tribunal justified in passing the order as the respondent did not file a counter, thus the petition is dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. No costs.

The Commissioner Vs D.Darshan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2005)

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT.JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI

¶2

¶3

HONOURABLE JUSTICE P.LAKSHMANA REDDY

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 13347 OF 2004

¶5

Dated 20-09-2005

¶6

Between:

¶7

The Commissioner, Rajendranagar Municipality, Rajendranagar, R. R. District.

¶8

…….Petitioner.

¶9

And:

¶10

1. D. Darshan, son of D.Ramesh, aged about 35 years, Occupation : Pump operator, resident of H.No.8-64, Narsing, Rajendranagar, R. R. District and others.

¶11

…….Respondents.

¶12

ORDER : (Per the Honourable Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari)

¶13

This writ petition has been filed by the writ petitioner against the order passed in O.A. No. 4347 of 2003, dated 18-07-2003 by the A.,P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad.

¶14

The writ petitioner is the 1^st respondent and respondents-1 to 4 are the applicants before the Tribunal. The parties will be referred to as arrayed before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience. Originally, the applicants filed an application in O.A. No. 4347 of 2003 seeking to direct the respondents to absorb them as regular workers who are presently working in Rajendranagar Municipality and pay the increments and other benefits etc., The Tribunal disposed of the O.A. at the admission stage,

¶15

directing the respondents to consider the claim of the respondents for regularization, within three months, in any one of the Class-IV posts strictly as per rules and as per GO Ms.No.212 M.A., dated 22-04-1994 as already they are understandably not only in continuous service since 1988 but also were given minimum in the time scale applicable to Class-IV employees of course without entitlement for drawal of annual grade increments, earned leave and other benefits till their services are absorbed in regular posts in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212 M.A. dated 22-4-1994 through proceedings No.C/MCR/1266/94 dated 30-06-1995. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents filed the present writ petition.

¶16

Heard both sides. We have perused the order impugned and material available on record.

¶17

The case of the respondents is that the applicants were engaged as N. M. Rs. and as per G.O.Ms.No.212 M.A., dated 22-4-1994, they have not fulfilled the requirement of completing five years of continuous service as on 25-11-1993 in order to entitle them for regularization of their services and as such, their services have not been regularized for which they filed O.A.No.4347 of 2003 and the Tribunal disposed of directing the 1^st respondent to consider the claim of the applicants for regularization. If an opportunity for filing counter was given to the 1^st respondent before the Tribunal, it would have been brought to the notice of the tribunal that the applicants were engaged in the year 1990 and as such, they have not completed five years of continuous service as on 25-11-1993 as required in G.O.Ms.No.212 M.A., dated 22-04-1994 to enable them for regularization of their services. Therefore, the order of the Tribunal is erroneous and is liable to be set aside.

¶18

The case of the applicants is that they were initially appointed as Pump Operator, Asst. Bore Well Mechanic and Pipe Line Fitter on 01-04-1988 and 01-051988. Even though there are regular posts available in the organization and Government formulated a scheme for regularizing their services who are in service on or before November, 1993 and completed more than five years of service, the respondents did not regularise their services.

¶19

We have gone through the order impugned. As could be seen from the material available on record, as per the proceedings No:C/MCR/1266/1994, dated 30.6.1995, the applicants were given minimum in the time scale applicanble to class IV employees, but without entitlement for drawal of annual increments, earned leave

¶20

etc. However, their services have not yet been regularized. The respondents have not contradicted the claim of the applicants by filing a counter before the Tribunal. In this background of the matter, the tribunal is justified in passing the order impunged and We see no merits in this writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

¶21

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶22

Justice T. MEENA KUMARI

¶23

Date: 20^th September, 2005

¶24

Justice P. LAKSHMANA REDDY

¶25

Dvs/nn

¶26

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI

¶27

¶28

HONOURABLE JUSTICE P. LAKSHMANA REDDY

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO. 13347 OF 2004 (Order delivered by the Honourable Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari)

¶30

Dated 20-09-2005

The Commissioner v. D.Darshan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commissioner v. D.Darshan

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

The Divisional Forest Officer, Vs Sri P. Narasimha Murthy

Pulla Jakaraiah Asst. Commissioner (Commercial Taxes), Vs Govt. of A.P.

G.a.Manohara Rao, Vs Union of India

Bhagwan Rao Vs Secretary

Dr.M.Vidya Sagar Vs Govt. of A.P.

The Regional Director of Medical and Health Services Vs Smt. M.Manjula Rani