Division Bench disposed of writ petitions challenging NMR regularization orders by following a common order in W.P. 29030 of 2013, directing respondents to consider cases in accordance with the B. Sriniwasala judgment.
Petition disposed of by following the common order dated 10.08.2022 in W.P. No. 29030 of 2013; no costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
13318l
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 32322 OF 2012
Between:
AND
(Respondents 1 to 7 are working as NMRs, Sanitation and Water Supply Section, Armoor Municipality, Nizamabad District)
(8th respondent is a formal party, as no relief is sought against.him) poNDENTs
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to Issue appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connection with the order dated 29-6-2011 passed in O.A.No.547212011 on the file of the Hon'ble
Andhra Pradesh Adr rirristrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and toqu rsh the same by holding as erroneou{ ard conlrary to law
l.A. NO: 1 OF 2012(\ PIMP. NO: 41199 OF 2012)
Petition under Section'151 CPC praying that in the cirlrrlrstances stated in the affidavit filed n suppo( of the petition, the High Cou 1 nr.ay be pleased suspend the ope alion of the orders dated 29-0(i-2 )'1 1 passed in O.A.No.54721201 1, n the file of the Hon'ble Andhra Prad:r;h Administratrve Tribunal, Hyderabac pending disposal of the writ petition
Counsel for the Peti icners: GP FOR SERVICES I
Counsel for Respor lent Nos. 1 to 7: SRI S. JAGADISH
The Court made thc fc llowing: ORDER
THE HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
W.P.No.32322 OF 2Ol2
ORDER: (l't'r I lort'blc, .Sn .,/rslice Ablrur and K:rlriar Shat.,ifi)
When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that a similar issue hasfallen for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.29030 of 2013 and batch and the Division Bench was pleased to dispose of the Writ Petition vide common order dated lO "Oa.2O22 and therefore, the present Writ Petition also deserves to be disposed of.
Miscella c,rus applications,if any, pcndirrg,s r' Ll; st:Lnd closed'
Sid/- N. RAJ GOPAL ASSISTANT REGIS TRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION bF FICER To, 1. Two CCs t CiP For Services, High Court for the Stat,: I Telarrqana [OUT] 2. One CC to iri S Jagadish Advocate [OPUC] (Along wit r a copy of Common Order dated 1O.Ot.1'.(22 in W.P.NO.29030 of 2013) 3, Two CD Ct :i,:s 4. One Spare )opy Km
HIGH CCIIIIRT
DATED:2' I'1012022
ORDER
WP.No.32i 22 of 2012
1 t, 511.1E --. \ "i
:) $t !t, 1$ll
DISPOSIN( I)F THE WRIT PETITION
WITHOUT( oSTS
@ofl"'
bt\w \
HON'BI-}: SttlJLTSTICE ABIII\A\D KL \1,\tl SHi\1'ILI AN I) HOvBI-E Si\Il JT]STICE C,,\Nt, T,.}I.<sup>(:II,\NRA</sup> AR I H\
ItX/.P.Nos.29010. 29729. 29734. 29791,.)98113_10050 OF 2013
COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri lustice tlbl:irard Ktnrtr Sbat:ili)
Since the rssue involved in all thesc writ petitions is one and the same, they are being heard togcther and disposed o[by way of this common order.
It is the casc of the petitioners that thc rcspondents are working as NMR workers and when *rcir services werc regularized with prospective efttcr, thel' have filed O.A.No.9702 of 201 I and batch conrcn<ling that their sen,ices should be regularized from the clate c>n rvhich they have completed five years of service. The Tribunal uidr order dated 26.06.20"12 allowed the said batch <;f cascs. .'\ggrievcd by the same, the present writ petitions arc filed.
l.earned counsel appearing for the petitic-rners as rvell as learoed Government Plcader Fcrl Scrvices-I appcaring for the respondents had fairly conceded that the issuc involved in all these writ petitions is squarely covercd by the dccision rendered by the Apex Court in B.Sriniuasala u. Nellore Municipal Corporationt , and also common order dated02.05.2018passed
I civil ApPsal No.6ll! ol2ol5 d&..nl.d on 17.0s 20l5
l;r'Dii llcnch oi this Coun irr \.. P.N o.3.i9.'(r ot 2()11and b.rt clr
[.) , \l]!, tlrt Llccistotr ,r: llrr ,\ncr(.oLrlt r i ','rttt, ,',',.,t Nel/ate '[.rlicipa/ Carporanon and also the cornmr,r or:r:ler,latcd 02.05.2(11 3 passed br. the Division Bench of *ir Coulr in \K.l).Nr,.. l!36 of 2011 md batch and for the rers,.r'rs alike, all the writ cri.ions arc disposcd of directing thc r,rt ti()ne's to consider h1i cescs of the respondents by dull' trliing lnto cor)sidcra() r the ,rbovc saidjLrclgrncnts ancl pas; a )lr()l)nate orrkls irt tc:orclancc r'".ith lau'. lt is needless to :a,' hat thc rcspondcr are entitled to only notional benei]ts,\v thout an], ffronetarv e]1efits. No costs
.{isc llLneous petitions, if an1', pending shall r;turd closccl
ABHINAND KLIMA 1 SI'AVI I,tJ
C.ANUP..\tA(lH \t\lt. ,\ \ {l tl\ ..,
Date:10.08.2 rkk 02 0J.2018 pasnd S .l,.No.ll9l6 of20ll
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to decide the writ petition regarding regularization of NMR services on the same basis as a previous batch of petitions.
Whether the Tribunal order allowing regularization with prospective effect is maintainable in light of nomenclature and existing precedents.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B. Sriniwasala u. Nellore Municipal CorporationFollowed¶56
B. Sriniwasala u. Nellore Municipal Corporation
Civil Appeals No.6144 of 2015Applied¶57
W.P. No.3,196 of 2011Applied¶58
W.P. Nos.1,136 of 2011Applied¶58
Government of Andhra Pradesh
J. Ramulu and others
Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
