Allowed

M.B.Rajashekar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Jul 2025WP/14021/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Typist appointed on compassionate grounds without the required typewriting qualification challenged a government memo rejecting relaxation and a show cause notice proposing reversion. Relying on prior judgments where relief was extended to similarly placed employees, the court set aside the memo and notice and directed fresh consideration of regularization and consequential benefits without insi

What did the court decide?

Impugned memo dated 19.07.2022 and show cause notice dated 10.04.2023 set aside; respondents directed to reconsider regularization and allied benefits without insisting on typewriting qualification, w

M.B.Rajashekar Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

) 13.2521

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 14021 0F 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

M B.Rajashekar, S/o. Late M.B.Chandraiah, Age- 34 years, Occ- Typist, Oio. Mandal Praja Parishad Muduchrnthalapally, Me?chal Malkajgiri Distriit

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Slate of Telangana, Bep, Oy its Principal Secretary, panchayat Raj and Rural Employment Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶12

2 The Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment, State of Telangana, Near Urdu Hall Lane, Himiyatnagar, Hyderabad.

¶13

3 The Chief Executive Otlicer, Zilla Praja Parishad Medchal, Medchal - Malkajgiri District

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 ol the Constitution of lndia 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

¶16

(a) By declaring the entire action of the respondents, in not regularrzing the services of the petitioner and not declaring probatlon in the cadre of Typist and also not releasing periodical increments and other allied benefits, despite of possessing B.Tech (Computers) as well as Office Automatron Course, on the untenable ground that, the petitroners did not acquired typewriting qualification mentioned in the orders of appointment other way issuing impugned Memo.No PRRD-[MZET/1/29t2O21- dt'19.07 2022 by the respondent and consequential show cause nottce No. A 1/Esst/2023- dt10 04.2023 by the 3rd respondent (which is not implemented as to today)

¶17

rs as highly illegar, arbitrary, discriminatory, anc contrary to the Divilion Bench jrdgment of the Honbre court in wF No.1132112019, dated 148.2019 r/w recent judgement dated 16.04 2ci 1 in wp No.i7966/2020 including orders in oA No. 2201/2014, dated 02 (g zo14 r/w recent orders of relaxatron issued in G.O Ms.No.1, BCW (A) Dect _ dt_ 04.01 2022 of the Govt. in the same subject matter and contrary tc, vaiious orders issued by the Govt in the similar subject matter, and set a.ide the above impugned memo dated 19.07 2022 0f the 1st respondent and consequentiar show cause notice dated- 10.O4.2423 ol the 3rd responrlent.

¶18

(b) And consequently to direct the respondents tc forthwith regularize the services c,f the petitioner w.e.f his date of joinin,l into duty as Typist and also declare probatron with aI consequentiar ber efits. such as seniority, pay fixation and other aIied benefits without rnsisting for passing of

¶19

technical qualification of Typewriting Higher ()rade both Telugu and English wrthout reference to the present impugnerl orders issued in Memo No., PRRD-IMZET/I t29t2OZ1- dt-19.07.2022 by the respondent and consequential show cause notice No. Al/Esst/2oir.t- dt- i 0.04 2023 of the 3rd respondent, (served on 0'1 .06.2023) in vie ar of simirar reraxatron orders which was granted in favour of certain <;lass of employees vide G O.t\4s Nc, 116 GA (Ser.B) Dept dated 29.2.2OOB G.O.Ms.No 68_ dated_ 11 03.201C and G O.Ms.No.1 BCW (A) Dept._dt O4.O1 ZO22 as weil as

¶20

possessing of B.Tech (Computers) along wrlh Office Automation certificate, in view of raw raid down by this Hc nbre court in wp No 1132112010 dated 14 8.2019, r/w recent orders rl {ed 16.04.2021 in Wp No.17966/2020 and order in oA No. 220112014 dated 2.9.2014 of the erstwhile APAT and recent orders issued vide G.O.Ms.No..l BCW (A) Dept.- 04.01 .2022 rn the same subject matter.

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2O23

¶22

Petition r:nder section 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file,J in support of the petition, the High cc urt may be preased to suspend the operation of the present impugnec orders issued rn Memo.No PRRD-MZEr t1egr2o21- dt-19 0r.2022 or the rsi respondent rncruding consequentiar show cause notice No. A1lEsst/2023- dr 'a 04.2023 (served on

¶23

01-06-2023) (which is not implemented as on today) of the 3rd respondent io, enable the petitioner to continue as Typist in view of law laid down by Hon'ble court in WP No. 1132112019, dated 14.8.2019, and recent orders dated 16042021 in WP No 1796612020 and order in OA No. 2201t2014. dated 2.9.2014 of the erstwhile APAT r/w recent orders issued in G.O.tVts.No.1 BCW (A) Dept., dt- 04 01 .2022 of the Govt. in the same subject maiter

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ARVIND KUMAR KATA

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: AGP FOR SERVICES-II

¶26

Counsel forthe Respondent No.3: SRI K.PRADEEP REDDY, SC FOR Zpp

¶27

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶28

WR TP TITI N 1 2L F 23

¶29

HON'BLE^{MRS. JUSTICESUREPALLI NANDA}

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

Heard Sri^{Arvind Kumar Kata, learneCcounsel} appearlng^{onbehalf of the petitioner,learnecAssistant} GovernmentPleaderforServices-Il,appearingonbehalf of resPondent^{Nos.1 and 2} and Sri. K.^{Prade:ep ReddY,} for TS Ztlla^Parishads, learned^{StandingCounsel} appearing^{on behalf of the respondent No'3'}

¶32

The^{petitionerfiled the writ petition seeking} the foltowing^{relief :}

¶33

"...to issue^{a Writ, order or direction more particula-lyone} in the nature^{of Writ of MANDAMUS:-}

¶34

(a) By declaring^{the entire action of the responc('nts'in} iti reguta.izlng-^{the services of the petitioners and not} declariig^{probatlon in the cadreof Typistand} .a^{so not} r-eteuting^{preriodicat increments and other alliedb:nefits'} dLspite^{"oi possessing B.Tech(Computers)as 'vell as} Office Automation^{Course, on the untenable grour d that'} the petitioner^{did not acquiretypewritingqualification} meniioned in the^{orders of appointmentotlr:r way} issuing lmpugned^{Memo.No.PRRD-MZET/U2()/2O2L-} eated" 79.01'.2022^{by the 1'tresponderl and} ionsequential^{show causenotice No.A1/Estt/2oi'- i dated} 10.04.)023 by the^{3.d respondent(which isnot} implemented as to^{today)is as highly illegal,atbitrary,} discriminatory, and^{contrary tothe Division Bench} judgment of the Hon'ble Court in^{/P No'113;ZLl2019,} iat6O f+.e.2019 r/w^{recent judgment dated 16 04'2021} in WP No.17966/2020^{includingorders in()A No'} 22O:./2O1,+, dated^{02.09.2O14rlw recentorlers of} relaxation tssued in^{G.O.Ms.No.1, BCW (A) Dep} '^dated 04.012022 ot the Govt.^{in the samesubjectm;l 'ter and}

¶35

'- *'1

¶36

¶37

SN. J wP t.t02t 2021 I

¶38

¶39

contrary to^{various ordersissued} by the Govt., in the similar subject^matter,and set aside the above impugned memo dated^L9.O7.2O22 of the 1't respondent and consequential^{show cause} notice dated 10.04.2023 of the 3'd respondent.

¶40

(b) And consequently to direct the respondents to forthwith^{regularizethe services} of the petitioner w.e.f their date of^{joining into duty} as Typist and also declare probation with all consequential benefits. such as seniority,^{pay fixation and} other allied benefits without insisting for^passing of technical qualification of Typewriting^{Higher Grade} both Telugu and English, without reference^{to the present} impugned orders issued in Memo^{No. PRRD-MZET/!/29/2021,} dated t9.O7 .2022 by the 1't^{respondent and} consequential show cause notice No.^A1, /^{Esst/2j2e, dated} 10.04.2023 of the 3.d respondent^{(Served on 01.06.2023)} in view of similar relaxation orders^{whichwas granted} in favour of certain class of employees^{vide G.O.Ms.No.116} GA (Ser.B) Dept. dated 29.2.2008,^{G.O.Ms.No.68,} dated 11.03.2010 and G.O.Ms.No.1^{BCW (A) Dept. dated} 04.01.2022 as welt as possessing of B.Tech^(Computers) along with Office Automation^{Certificate,in view} of law laid down by this Honble Court^{in WP No.1132t/2ot9,} dated 14.8.2019, r/w recent^{orders dated} 76.04.2027 in Wp No.1796612O20^{and order in OA} No. 22OU2O|4, dated 2.9.2074 of^{the erstwhile APAT} in the same subject matter and^to Pass..^"

¶41

The case of^{the petltioner} in brief, is that the petitioner was appointed as^{Typist vide} Order dated 13.03.2O17 of the 3.d respondent on compassionate^grounds in place of his deceased father who passed away on 23.03.2015 in harness while in service. The petitioner^had been appointed with a condition that the petitioner should acquire Typewriting Higher Grade both in English and Telugu within the stipulated time as per G.O.Ms.No.612 dated 30.10.1991 and allotted to the office of

¶42

SN, J \4P t402 r 2023

1 I I

i I

)

Mandal Praja Parishad. The petitioner joined dutl on 13.03.2017. The petitioner's further case is that the Goverrrment has taken a decision relaxing acquisition oF quatification o' iypewriting as well as Shorthand as per G.O.Ms.No.116, daterl 29.02.2008 to the persons appointed between 05.03.1987 to 14.08.1988 and as per G.O.Ms.No.68 dated 11.03.2010 acquisitirt.r of Typewriting qualifications; for Junior Accountants is also relaxed. As per G.O.Rt.No.442B, dated 2t.t2.2OII acquisitior of Typewriting qualification is not necessary. It is also the case of petitioners that due to non-acquisition of technical qualifica:ions, probation of the petitioner had not been declared and services of the petitioner in the cadre of Typist had not been regularized. As per the Judgment of the Division bench of this court dated 14.08.2019 in W.P.No.1 t32t of 2019 and th: Judgment in WP.No.17966/2020 dated t6.O4.2OZt, the petil ioner contends that the petitioner herein is entitled for regur;rrization of his services in the cadre of Typist. It is further tre case of the petitioner that the 3'd respondent issued impugnrrd memo dated 79.07.2022 and show cause notice dated 10.04 .1023 proposing to revert the petitioner to the post of Offi<:r: Subordinate.

SN. J wP 1402 r 2021

Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioners approached the Court by filing the present writ^petition.

¶51

4. PERUSED THE RECORD.

¶52

(A) The imouqned order vide Memo No. PRRD-

¶53

MZET/L/29/ 2O21, Dated 19. 7.2(J22 of the 1't resoondent

¶54

is extracted hereunder:

¶55

GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA

¶56

PANCHAYAT RA] AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT (MZET) DEPARTMENT

¶57

Memo. No.PRRD-MZET/t/29/202r Datedilg-j7-2022

¶58

Sub: Suits-High Court, Telangana-Contempt case No. 848 of 2022 in WP.No.638/2022 filed by P.Sravya D/o Late P.Ramaiah, Typist, ZPP, Medchal, Medchal Mandal Malkajgiri District and 22 others - Interim direction passed in the W. P. for considering the petitioners' request for relaxation of rules for acquiring the Typewriting English and Telugu Higher Grade -Examined^- Speaking orders - Issued.

¶59

Ref:

¶60

G.O.Ms.No.969, G.A (Sers.A) Deptt., dt.27-10-1995.

¶61

2.From the CPR & RE, Hyderabad, Lr. No.760414/CPR & RE/ Ct / Mdl / 2O2O, Dt.O4.O2.2021.

¶62

Govt. Memo. No. MZET-PRRD / t / 29 / AU 2O2, dt.09.03. 202 1,

¶63

From the Hon'ble High Court, Interim orders dt. 06.O1.2022 in I.A. No.1 of 2022 in WP.No.638 of 2022.

¶64

From the G.P for Services.II (T.S), High Court, Hyderabad C.C.No.848 of 2022 in WP.No.638/2022.

¶65

From the CPR & RE, Hyderabad, Lr. No.760414lCPR & RE/ Cl / vtdl / 2o2o, Dt.o7 .o7 .2022.

r2fri

wP r402r

)

P.Sravya, Typist O/o Zpp Medchal, Matakajgiri t4edchal District and 22 other Typists working in ZppSlMpps have fileC W.p.No.638 of 2022 in the Hon'ble High Court for relaxation of rules to acqulre the typewriting qualification duly amending the relevant rules and re_ designate the post of Typlst as Assistant-cum-CompLter.operator. as was done in the similarly situated cases of other Depart nents. 2. In the reference 4th cited, the Hon,ble High Cou t in its interim directions dt.6.O7.2022 in IA No.1 of 2022 in Wp.No.6lB of 2022 has passed the following orders;

¶70

"Pending consideration of the writ petition, lhe 2nd respondent is directed to consider the tetter dt.04.02.2021 stated to have been addres::ed by the riommissioner of^panchayat Raj & Rural Development to the 2'd respondent.,,

¶71

The CPR & RE, Hyderabad in his letter 2nd :ited, has ] furnished that the Telangana panchayat Raj vlinisterial Association State unit and 26 Typists from Ranga Redly district and 14 Typists from Karimnagar District have sr_rtrmitted a representation submitting that, most of the typ sts have completed reasonable years of service in the cadre of .ypist and due to lack of faculty to impart the proper trainin(, lack of availability of typewriting institutions in Rural A-eas and prolonged office hours in addition to attending to th 3ir family problems, they could not acquire Type Writing qualification and they continue to be as a temporary empioyees without regularizing their services and also deprived for further )romotion as Senior Assistant. Moreover, after rapid usage of cortputers in Panchayat Raj Institutions. only computers are being u: ed in the offices. Hence, they requested that appropriate relief ;hould be given to them.

¶72

The CPR & RE, Hyd has further stated that, as seen from the representation and reports of the Chiet Executive Officers, Zilla Praja Parishads, Rangareddy and Karimnagar dist.icts, it is observed that, 26 Typists from Rangareddy district and _ 4 Typists from Karimnagar district who are appointed on Comoassionate Grounds on conditional basis have not acquired the pr,3 requisite qualification prescribed in the rules so far though the extended time allowed of four years in the appointment orders is already elapsed.

¶73

: .The^{matterhaving beenexamined, it is not corr€ct to say} that the typewriting institutions are closed or not ava lable. In fact the petitioners of erstwhile Rangareddy District are close to

SN. J wP r 4021 2021

Hyderabad city and there is no shortage of typewriting institutions. Further most of these^{petitioner were appointedin} between 2015 to 2O2L i.e.,7^years ago but they^{have not shown} any interest to acquire typing skills. On^perusal of'the^report furnished by Chief Executive Officers it is observed that^their €olleagues who were working in the same^{District have appeared} /^{passed the typing exam whereas the petitioners havemerely} cited excuses.

¶79

In this connection, as^{per para} 2(vii) of^{G.O.Ms'No'612.} G.A.(Ser.A)Dept., dt.30.10.1991, it has been ordered^{that where} Typewriting is an essential^{qualification} to a^post the candidate who do not possess these^{qualifications} may be considered^for appointment to such categories of^posts under the^{scheme of} compassionate appointments, subject to the condition^{that they} should acquire such qualification within two^years after such appointment.

¶80

7 In the reference 1st cited, Government have issued orders that, in cases of dependent of the deceased^Government employees, who do not^possess the minimum^Educational qualification or Typewriting qualification prescribed for the^post to which they are appointed with a condition to acquire^such requisite qualification within the stipulated^{periodprescribedin} the Government orders, fail to acquire such^{requisite qualification} within that stipulated time, such candidates^may be^allowed/ given a further period of 2 (two) more^years over and above the period prescribed in the Government orders as grace^period to acquire such requisite Educational or Typewriting^{qualification} prescribed for the post to which they were appointed.

¶81

B. As per the above G.O., "if the candidates concerned fails to acquire the requisite educational or Type-writing^{qualifications} even within the extended^{grace period,} then^{he/shemay be} considered for appointment for a lower^post such^{as an Attender} where such educational or Typewriting^{qualification} is^not prescribed and accordingly he/she may be appointed in a lower post such as an Attender as if he/she is a fresh candidate, after obtaining the willingness of the candidate. If^{he/she is not willing} to take the Iower^post it shall be treated that^{there are no} compelling reasons of poverty and such candidate be discharged from service.^"

,/.

-a/

SN. J \,P I4021 2023

The appointments to the applicants as Typist rave been made on compassionate grounds and appointed conditi rnally with a condition to acquire Typewriting English Higher ,ard Telugu Higher within a period of (2) years from the date of ap pointment as per Cir. Memo. No.60681/Ser.A/2003-1, GAD, dt.l.:1.08.2003. Further some other conditlonally appointed typists whc have been appointed on similar conditions with petitioners, har e already acquired the Typewriting English Higher and Telugu Hiqlrer skills.

¶87

The applicants in WP.No.63a/2O22 appointed as Typists in ZPPS/MPPS on Compassionate Grc,unds on conditional basis during the years ot 2OL6/2OL7 /2OLg and they should pass qualification of Typewriting Te lugu and English Higher grades with in a period of four (4) years i.e 2 years + 2 years grace period. But they have not acquired the Typewriting qualification even within the extended grace period. Moreover, at the time of appointrlent, the Petitioners have given undertaking on conditiona grounds to acquire the requisite qualafication within rhe time prescribed, but failed to acquire the skills.

¶88

In light of the above and in compliance to the interim orders of the Hon'ble High Court, the prot,osal for relaxation of rules in respect of p.Sravya, Typist, Zpp, Medchal, Medchal Mandal Malkajgiri District and 22 other Typist<, for acquiring the typewriting qualificatio r English and Telugu Higher Grade duly amending the relevant iules and re-designate the post of Typist as Assistant cum Computer operator, has been examined and the same is not feasible for consideration as Ber para (6) of G.O,Ms.No,969, G.A(Sers.A) Dept., dt.27-1O-1995., and accordingly the request is hereby rejected.

¶89

The Director, PR&RE, Hyderabad and Chief Executive Officer, Vikarabad/Ranga Reddy/Medchal-Malkajgiri arr_. therefore requested to take further necessary action as per p,i ra (6) of G.O.Ms.No.969, G.A(Sers.A) Dept., dt.27-10-1995, in tre matter accordingly and also requested to serve these orde-s to the petitioners concerned and send the served copie; to the Government immediately.

¶90

Sd/-x x >:

¶91

SANDEEP KUMAR ;ULTANIA SECRETARY TO GCVERNlvlENT.

)

SN, J wP t4021 2023

(B) This Court passed interim .order dated

¶97

07.06.2023 observinq as under:

¶98

"Notice before admission

¶99

Learned Government Pleader for Services II takes notice on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 2 and waives further notice.

¶100

Mr.P.Kishore Rao, learned standing counsel takes notice on behalf of the respondent No.3 and waives further notice.

¶101

Registry is directed not to take out notice to respondents No.1 to 3 in view of this waiver.

¶102

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are all graduates in computer science and have been appointed as Typists on compassionate grounds. He submitted that due to lack of Typewriting institutions, the^petittoners have not been able to acquire the^{qualification} of Typewriting within^the time granted and therefore, they have sought relaxation of the said condition. However, their request has been rejected and^a show cause notice has been issued to revert them to the lower posts. Challenging the same, the writ petitions have been filed.

¶103

Learned counsel For the petitioners submitted. that^vide G.O.Ms.No.1 dated 04.01.2022, the^.Government of^Telangana itself has relaxed the condition of obtaining the^{qualification} of Typewriting in English and Telugu in respect of similarly^placed candidates in the BC WelFare Department.

¶104

It is submitted that in similar cases, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh has granted relief to the^petitioners and this Courtⁱⁿ W.P.No.39096 of 2022 vide orders dated 20.10.2022 also^has granted interim suspension of the impugned order. He^prays for similar order in this case as^well.

¶105

Learned counsel for the respondents seeks time for filing counter.

¶106

List on 21.06.2023

¶107

Till such time, there shail be interim suspension of^the impugned order. "

¶108

¶109

SN. J wP r.l02l 202 ]

¶110

The said orders granted in favour of the pet tioner had been extended pending further orders vide or<j:rs of this court dated 21.06.2023.

¶111

DISCUSSION A D CONCLU SION:

¶112

s. The learned counsel appearing on behalF of the petitioner contends that the subject issue is squarely covered by the Division Bench Jucigment of this Court dated 14.08.2019 passed in W.P. No. 11321 of 2019, the Division Bench Jurlgment of this Court dated 25.07.2024 passed in W.p. No. 2839 . of 2Ot4 and also the Judgments of this Court dated 28.06.2(t23 passed in W.P.No.13595 of 2027 and dated t6.04.202t pr;rssed in W.p. No.1796 of 2020.

¶113

The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents does not dispute insofar as the relie, extended to other similarly situated persons but contends that :he said relief had not been extended to those employees workinc in panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department. The ler rned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner disputes : re same and places reliance on the Judgment dated 16.04.2021 passed in W.P.No.17966 ol 2O2O where under the petit oner therein

SN, J wP 14021 2023

discharged the duty as typist in the office of^{ChiefExecutive} Officer, Zilla Parishad, Kakinada, East Godavari

¶118

7 The Aoex Court in the Judqment dat 22.11.1988 oassed in Civil Aooeal Nos. 2L2 ot L979,³²¹⁴ of^L979 n 3518 of 1 n hri H h n nd othe V nl n of India hers at N .13 observ

¶119

u nder:

¶120

"The view that has been taken by this Court in the above, observation is that once a decision^{has been taken,} there is a tendency to uphold it and a^{representationmay} not yield any fruitful^purpose. Thus, even if^{any hearing} was given to the employees of CORIL after the^{issuance of} the impugned circular, that^{would not be any compliance} with the rules of natural^justice or^{avoid the mischief of} arbitraries as contemplated by Article 14^ofthe Constitution. The High court, in our^{opinion, wasperfectly} justified in quashing the impugned circular".

¶121

In the said^judgment it had been observed at^{para No.13} that once a decision has^{been taken,the said decision has to be} upheld and the said decision^{shouldbe extended to other} similarly situated individuals and the^{samecannot be denied} arbitrarily in violation of Article 14 of the^{Constitution of India.}

¶122

\ t!

¶123

¶124

SN. J .! P l.l02l²⁰²³

¶125

A bare^{perusal of the recordclearly indicates that with} regard^{to junior Stenographerswho had been appoint:dbetween} 05.03.1987^{and 14'07'1998,a relaxation had beenprovided} from acquiring^{qualification of Typewriting and Shorti,andHigher} Grade as^{per t3.O.Ms'No'116 dated 29'O2'2OOB'Similarly'} G.O.Ms.No.68,^{dated 11'03'2010as borne on rer:ord filed as} material^{document by the petitioner in support of the petitioner's} case also^{indicates asimilar relief inrespectofJunior} Accountants^{appointed on compassionate grounds :onditionally} and are^{working in T & A serviceas on 27 'tO'2007 '}

¶126

T ivrs n e h t ts rt n Judqment dated 14.o 8.20 1 D ssedin w.P. No. 1 L32l f 19 dealin^{qw ith} ca Der ininoto^qr nt rela xati^{on from} ac lr w ln tif ti n s n/ i:ts under:

¶127

"In the above background,^{now the issue that emerqesfor} consideration^{of this Courtis:}

¶128

"Whether the order^{passed by the I libunalis} sustainable^{and tenable and whether the samr:warrants} any interference^{of this Court under Article 2l':6 of the} Constitution^{of India"?}

--s1

SN. J wP r102r 2021

It is no doubt true that, pursuant to the unfortunate death of the respondent's husband, while working as Senior Assistnat, the a pplica nt-respon dent was initially appointed as a Typist with a condition that she should.acquire the necessary qualification in Typewriting within a period of two years from the date of initial appointment. It is also not in controversy that, despite the time granted by the authorities, the respondent herein could not acquire the necessary qualification, as per the said condition. It is not in dispute that the applicant herein is a graduate in Computers and also possesses PGDCA and also possesses Typewriting English Lower Grade qualification. It is pertinent to note that the State Government granted relaxation in favour of certain class of employees, vide G.O.Ms.No. t16, GA (Ser.B) Department, dated 29.O2.2O08, having noticed the non-existence of Typewriting tra ining institutions. It is also not in n v r h in2 1 h r n qranted relaxation from acquirino Tvpewritanq oualification in respect of Treasurv Department. The Tribunal also noted about the non-existence of Typewriting trainlng institutions and the usage of Computers in all the offices. The reality remains that, apart from the degree qualification in Computers, the applicant possesses PGDCA also. It is not the case of the resDondents herein that the aoolicant has not discharged her duties oroperly d r rc f.r the lack ofT vne wrtt tn o H' (! h r G radc oualification.

¶133

A perusal of the order passed by the Tribunal, in clear and vivid terms, discloses that the Tribunal, after

¶134

¶135

SN, J \P 14021 2023

¶136

elaborately and meticulously considering vario rs issues, including the relaxation given by the state Government, by way of the above referred Governmental Orders, and also the present situation, with regard to the non-usage of type machines and the usage of Computers, ca rI e to the lusi n t h ln n r spondent authorities cannot be sustained,,.

¶137

The said writ petition filed by the respondents had been dismissed upholding the order dated 06.11.2017 lrassed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA. No 1856 of 2017 whereunder the Tribunar had directed to consider tlre case of the applicants in C).A. No. 1856 of 2Ot7 for relaxatiorr of acquiring the Typewriting qualification and English Highe-Grade and Telugu Lower Grade.

¶138

L2. In the recent Divisi n Bench Judoment of this Court dated 25-O 7.2024 oassed in W. P. No. 283,r1 of2 t4 dealinq with an identical situation at oara Nos ,7 to 12 it is observed as u der:

¶139

"7. The learned Government pleader further contended that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate .the fact that the relaxation from passing the typewriting and shorthand higher grade in Telugu given vide G.O.Ms.No.116, GA (Ser_ B) Department, dated 29.O2.2O0a is applicable orly to the Junior Stenographers appointed between 05.03.19g7 and

'.i

SN, J wP 1.102 t 2021

¶144

14.07.1998, but not to the Typists and so also one time exemption was granted vide G.O.Ms.No.783, Fin. (Admn.III) Department, dated 31.12.2001 to Junior Assistants in Treasuries and Accounts Department from passing typewriting English higher grade because the said qualification was not prescribed in any other Departments to the equivalent category of Junior Accountants, however, said exemption cannot be extended to the Typists, whose services are governed under A.P. Ministerial Service Rules.

¶145

The learned Government Pleader had further contended that the Tribunal has not appreciated the fact that one time relaxation accorded vide G.O.Ms.No.68, Finance (Admn.III) Department, dated 11.03.2010 from passing typewriting English higher grade is applicable only to the Junior Accountants, but not to the Typist category. it is further contended that respondent no.1 was given notice in the year 2003 and two more years were extended to acquire required qualification, but he could not acquire the same in ten years and that respondent no.1 cannot blame the Department for not initiating timely action against him, and therefore. the petitioners have rightly issued the impugned show-cause notice dated O9.O2.2OL2 and the Government Orders referred to above cannot be made applicable to the case of the respondent no.1 and prayed to set aside the order dated O9.O7.2013 passed by the Tribunal and allow the writ petition.

¶146

Admittedly, respondent no.1 was temporarily ."**---.:r3.j:"=L=JJ_r-:Lei-:9P.::ge':::1:condition to aiquire the requisite qualification i.e., typewriting Higher in both Telugu and English within two years vide proceedings dated 2A.L[.ZOOL, but the

SN, J wP 14021²⁰²³

respondent no.1 did^{not acquire the said requisite} qualification within the time^{stipulat(ld'The} respondent no.1^{submittedrepresental ionon} 06.1O.2OO3 to^{extendtwo more years to acrlulre the} said qualification.^{Though,the grace periotlof two} more years w.e,l.^{27.12.2OO3 to27'12'21)05 was} granted to the respondent^{no.1 vide proceedings} dated 07,O1.2OO4,^{he did notacquire :he said} qualification. However, the^{petitioners did not take} any action even^{after expiry of graceperiodq ranted to} the respondent^{no.1 foracquiring therequisite} qualification and kept^{quiet for a period of six years} after^{grace period and continued the responrlent no'1} for more than six^{years later and issuedshrw-cause} notice only on 09.02.2012.^{After havingcont nued the} respondent no.1 for^{more than a decadear'd having} utilized his services^{as Typast for such long p':riod, the} petitioners cannot ask the respondent^{no.1 t'r give his} willingness to take appointment^{in the cadre of lowest} post i.e,, Attender as he did^{not acquire the requisite} qualification of pass in typewriting^{higherg -ade both} in Telugu and English.

¶151

Furthermore, as^per the^{G.O.Ms.No. I16, dated} 29.02.2008, the Government^{had granted exeme:ionto the} individuals from^{passing typewritingand shorthrndhigher} grade in Telugu and subsequently, the^{same benefitwas} extended to the Junior^{Accountantsof Treal;uries and} Accounts,ride G.O.Ms.No.68, dated^11.03.2010.

¶152

Perusal of the imPugned order dated^()9.07.2013 wou ld disclose that the Tribunal on due consirleration^of

SN, J wP l:1021 202i

G.O.Ms.No.116, dated 29.02.2OO8 and G.O.Ms.No.68 dated 11.03.2010 and also in view of fact that the respondent no.1/ applicant was allowed to continue for a decade as L.D.Typist and utilized his services, has come to a conclusion that the impugned show-cause notice dated 09.O2.2O12 issued by the 3'd petitioner herein as improper and thus, declared the same as illegal.

¶157

!2. In view of the above discussion and facts of the case, this Court is of the considered view that having continued the respondent no.1/applicant for such long period as L.D. Typist and having utilized his services for such period, issuing impugned show-cause notice dated 09.O2.2OL2 to revert the applicant to a lower post after a long lapse of period would be unjust. Therefore, interfering with the settled position after lapse of a decade is not feasible at this point of time and is contrary to the well established principles of equity and justice. Thus, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the Tribunal passed in O.A.No.1088 of 2Ol2 with VMA No.557 of 2012".

¶158

This Court opines that the petitioner is also entitled for grant of similar relief and the petitioner cannot be denied the benefits granted to similarly situated persons like the petitioner.

¶159

L4. Takinq into consideration:

¶160

)

¶161

¶162

SN, J wP t,l02 r 2023

¶163

(a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the

¶164

case,

¶165

(b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the^petitioner, l:he^learned Assistant Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of respondents,

¶166

¶167

(d) The contents of the order impugned dated L9.O7.2022 issued by the 1't responderrt and the subsequent show cause notice dated 1O.O4.12O23 served upon the petitioner on 01.O6.2O23,

¶168

(e) The contents of the G.O.Ms.No 116, dated 29.02.2008,

¶169

(f) The contents of the G.O.Ms.No.68, dated 11.03.2010,

¶170

(S) The Division Bench Judgment datecl 14.O8.2O19 passed in w.P. No. 11321 of 2O19 (refelred to and extracted above),

SN, J wP 1,1021 2023

(h) The order dated 16.O4.2021^{passed in W.P. No'} L7g66 ot 2O2O which had been^{implementedin respectof} the petitioner thereunder,

¶176

(i) The Division Bench order of^{this Court dated} 25.07.2O2L passed in^{W.P. No. 28391ot 2OL4,(referred} to and extracted above),

¶177

The writ petition is allowed^{as prayed for'The} impugned Memo No.^{PRRD-MZET/Ll29l2O2L,dated} LI.O7.2O22 of the 1't^{respondentis set aside and the} subsequent show^{causenoticedated 1O.O4} '2023^{of the 3'd} respondent is set aside.^{The respondents are directed to} reconsider the request^{of the petitioner for regularization} of services of the^{petitioner with effect from petitioner} joining duty as Typist and also consider^{the request of the} petitioner for release of all consequential^{benefits, suchas} seniority,^{pay fixationand other allied benefitswithout} insisting for^{passing oftechnical qualification of}

¶178

Typewriting Higher^{grade both in Telugu and Englishduly} takang into consideration^{the order passed by Division} Bench of this Court dated^{14.08.2019in W'P' No' 11321 of} 2019, the order dated^{L6'O4'2O2Lpassed in W'P' No'}

¶179

¶180

SN. J ' 't, 14021 l02l

¶181

¶182

L7g66 ol 2O2Ot^{the order dated O2'O9'2O14 passe'd in O'A'} No. 2201 ot^{2OL4, G.O.Ms.No'1,dated O4'O1-'2O2"'-and the} recent Division^{Benchorder dated25'(J7'2024 passed in} W.P. No. 28391^{ol 2OL4 and pass appropriate ordersin} accordance to^{|aw, in conformity with principles} 'rf^natural justice by providing an opportunity^{of personal trearing to} the petitioner,^{within four (4) weeks from th:date of} receipt of a copy^{of this order and duly commu'ricate the} decision on the^{subjectissue to the petitioner'However'}