Allowed

Smt N.Vahini, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Jul 2025WP/14023/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two typists appointed on compassionate/medical grounds without typewriting qualification sought regularization and probation declaration after the government rejected relaxation and issued a show cause notice proposing reversion. Citing earlier judgments granting relief in identical situations and Article 14 equity principles, the court set aside the memo and notice and directed reconsideration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned memo dated 19.07.2022 and show cause notice dated 20.03.2023 set aside; respondents directed to reconsider regularization and benefits within four weeks with personal hearing.

Smt N.Vahini, Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

132521

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE ST4TE.OI TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Originat Jurisdictioni'^{' ' '}

¶4

TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND rwerrrri rrvE .

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 14023 oF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

1 Smt N.Vahini, Wo Late N era;a ei,,srral li;;d:ffi; E?ff:49?rrr:Jears,^{occ rvpist,} o/o Mandar

¶10

2 B,t5fii'Ar:i: "?,',.??Si^{-l,y& iJo5;fl:d,..Bf . rvp ist, o/o Ma nda r praja}

¶11

AND

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

1 pa nchayat Ra j a nd

¶14

If.iE|"o^gil?:iBxl? B:3,,",0,t,,,i fi ;,x3l3g::""*tary, The Commissioner. panchayat. .Raj and Rural Employment, State of lelangana, Near Urdu Hatt farie, HrmZyrinJgrr.ffi"LOrO.

¶15

3 R?r[f", Executive Officer, Zila praja parishad Ranga Reddy, Ranga Reddy

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia 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 particurarry one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS.

¶18

(a) By decraring the entire action of the respondents, in not regurarizing the services of the petitioners and not decraring probation in the cadre of rypist and also not releasing periodical increments and other allied benefits, despite of possessing B Sc (computers) by the 1St petitioner and B.com (computers) as well as PGDCA by the 2nd petitioner, on the untenable ground that, the petitioners did not acquired typewritrng quarification mentioned in the orders of appointment, other way issuing impugned Memo No 1/2912021 dt 19 07 2022 by the 1st respondent and consequentiar 'RRD_MZETI show cause notice No

¶19

¶20

) 42t1858t2020. dt :20 03.2023 by the 3rd respondent (whrc h rs not implemented as to today) is as highly illegal, arbitrary, discriminator),. and contrary to the Division Bench juclg ment of the Honble court in Wp N o 11321 l2o1g. dated 14.8.2019 r/w recent judgment dated .,|6.04.2021 in wp N. i7966/2020 including orders in oA No. ?-201/2014, dated 02.09.2 014 rtw rece. orders of reraxation issued in G.O.Ms No 1, BCW (A) Dept.. dt. 04.01.2022 of tre Govt in the same subject matter and contrary to various orders issued by thr Govt., in the simirar subject matter, and set aside the above impugned mem. dated 1g.07 .2022 0f the lst respondent and consequentiar show cause notice iated 26 03.2023 of the 3rd respondent And consequentry to direct the resorndents to forthwith regularize the services of the petitioners w.e.f their date . l0inrng into duty as Typists and also decrare probation with afl consequent;ir benefits, such as seniority, pay fixation and other aried benefits without ins,strng for passing of technical qualification of rypewriting Higher Grade both rerugu and Engrish, without reference to the present impugned orders issued rr l\rlemo No., pRRDMZET /1/2912021 . dt 19 07 2022 by rhe l St respondent an(r consequentiar show cause notice No. A2r1858r2o2o dt. 20.03.2023 by the 3rd re spondent, in view of similar reraxation orders which was granted in favour rf certain crass of employees vide ri.O.Ms.No..l 16 cA (Ser.B) Dept dated 29.2.2008. G.O Ms.No.68. dated 11.03.2010 and G O [/ls.No.1 i;CW (A) Dept. dt 04.01 .2022 as well as possessing of B.Sc (Computers) by lle 1st petitioner and B.com (computers) along with pGDCA by the 2nd petitione . rn view of law laid down by this Honbre court in wp No, -11321r201g, dated -.r 8 2019, r/w recent orders dated 16-04.2021 in wp No.1796612020 and order i. oA No. 220112014, daled 2 9.2014 of the erstwhile ApAT rn the same sub1ect ma ter

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶22

Petition under Section '151 cpc praying that in the ci cumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to suspend the operation of the present impugned orders issued in lVlemo No PRRD-MZET 11r2g/2021 . dt.1g.o7 .2022 of the 1st re spondent incruding consequentiar shoiv cause notice No A2r1g5}r2o2o dt 26 03 2023 (which is not implemented as on today) of the 3rd respondent to enabre the petitioners to contrnue as Typists in view of raw rard down by this Hon'br: court in wp No.

¶23

¶24

I 11321/2019. dated 14.8 2019, rlw recent orders dated 16.04.2021 in [,/p No 17966/2020 and order in oA No. 2201t2014, dated 2.9.2014 of the erstwhire APAT r/w recent orders issued in G.O,Ms,No.1 BCW (A) Dept., dt. 04.01 .2022 ot the Govt., in the same subject matter

¶25

Counsel for the petitioner: SRI ARVIND KUMAR KATA Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: AGp FOR SERVICES-II

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI K.PRADEEP REDDY, SC FOR Zpp The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

¶28

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA

¶29

WRIT PETITION No.14023 OF 20:23

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Kata, lea'ned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-Il, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri. K. Pr;rdeep Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for TS Zill,t Parishads, appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3.

¶32

2. The petitioners filed the writ petitior seeking the following relief :

¶33

"...to issue a Writ, order or direction more partir: rlarly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS:-

¶34

(a) By declaring the entire action of the resporrdents, rn not regularizing the services of the petitioners and not declaring; probation in the cadre of Typist anC also not releasinq periodical increments and other allied benefits, despite of possessing B.Sc (Computers) by the 1't petitioner and B.Tech (Computers) as well as F GDCA by the 2nd petitioner, on the untenabte ground that, the petitioners did not acquire typewriting qu:lification mentioned in the orders of appointment o her way issu ing impugned Memo.No. PRRD-MZET/ 1/ 29/2O2Ldated 19.07.2022 by the 1'L respondr:nt and consequential show cause notice No.A2l1858/2t20 dated 20.O3.2(t23 by the 3'd respondent (whicr is not implemented as to today) ls as highly illegal, rrbitrary,

I l I I

wp ,ro:t ]f:l

discriminatory, and contrary to the Division Bench judgment of the Hon'ble court in wP No.11321/2019, dated 14.8.2019 r/w recent judgment dated 16.04.2021 in WP No.17966/2020 including orders in OA No. 220t/2O14, dated 02.09.2074 r/w recent orders of relaxation issued in G.O.Ms.No.1, BCW (A) Dept. dated O4.O1.2022 of the Govt. in the same subject matter and contrary to various orders issued by the Govt., in the similar subject matter, and set aside the above impugned memo dated L9.O7 .2022 of the l't respondent and consequential show cause notice dated 20.03.2023 of the 3'd respondent.

¶40

(b) And consequently to direct the respondents to forthwith regularize the 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-MZETll/29/2021, dated t9.O7.2022 by the 1't respondent and consequential show cause notice No. A2/1858/2020, dared 20.03.2023 of the 3'd respondent in view of similar relaxation orders which was granted in favour of certain class of employees vide G.O.Ms.No.116 GA (Ser.B) Dept. dated 29.2.2OO8, G.O.Ms.No.68, dated 11.03.2010 and G.O.Ms.No.1 BCW (A) Dept, dated 04.01.2022 as well as possessing of B.Sc (Computers) by the 1't petitioner and B.Com (Computers) along with PGDCA by the 2"d petitioner, in view of law laid down by this Honble Court in WP No.11327/2Ot9,

.,,.,/

SN. J wP 1402i 2021

dated 14.8.2019, r/w recent orders dated 16.01.2021 in WP No. 17966/2020 and order in OA No. 22Ot/2Ot4, dated 2.9.2014 of the erstwhile APAT in the same subject rnatter and to pass..,,

¶46

The case oF the petitioners in brieF, is that insofar as 1sr petitioner is concerned, the 1st petitioner had bee.r appointed as Typist vide order dated 29.03.2018 of the 3.d -espondent on compassionate grounds in place of 1st petitioner,s deceased husband, who passed away on 04.06.2016 in harness while in service. Whereas the 2nd petitioner is concerned, the 2nt petitioner's been appointed as Typist vide order dated 01.08.2018 of the 3.d respondent on medical invalirlation in place of 2n't petitioner's father. Both the petitionei.s had been appointed with a condition that both the petit oners should acquire Typewriting Higher Grade both.in Englisr and Telugu within the stipulated time as per G.O.Ms.No.612 dated 30.10.1991 and posted to the office of Mandal praja parishad. Both the petitioners joined in duty on 28 03.2018 and 01.08.2018 and the Government had taken a de: sion relaxing acquisition of qualification oF Typewriting as well as Shorthand as per G.O.Ms.No.116, dated 29_O2.2OOB to the perscns appointed between 0S.03 1987 to 04.08.1988. As per G.O.Ms.No.68 dated

¶47

¶48

SN, J wP 11021 2021

¶49

11.03.2010 acquisition oF Typewriting qualifications for lunior Accountants is also relaxed. As per G.O.Rt.No.4428, dated 2L.12.2011 acquisition of Typewriting^{qualification} is not necessary. It is also the case of^petitioners that due to nonacquisition of technical^{qualifications, probation} of the^petitioners had not been declared and services of the^petitioners in the cadre ofTypist had not been regularized. As^per the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 14.08.2019ⁱⁿ W.P.No.11321 of 2019 and the Judgment in WP.No.17966/2020 dated 16.04.2021, the^petitioners contend that^{petitionersherein} are entitled for regularization of their services in the cadre^of Typist. It is further the case of the^petitioners that the 3'd respondent issued impugned show-cause notice dated 20.03.2023 proposing to revert the^petitioners to the^post oF Office Subordinate. The 1't respondent also issued^impugned orders dated 19.07.2022 against the^{petitioner.Aggrieved} by^the said orders, the^petitioners approached the Court by filing^the present writ petition.

¶50

4. PERU ED THE REC ORD

¶51

¶52

SN. J \ I, t4021 202_l

¶53

(A) The tmDuoned order vr;de Memo No. PRRDMZET L/29/ 2021, Dated L9.O7.2022 of the l't respondent is extracted hereunder:

¶54

GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA

¶55

PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT (MZET) DE],ARTMENT

¶56

Memo. No. PRRD-MZ EI/ 1 29/2021 Dated _79 1)/-2022

¶57

Sub: Suits- High Court, Telangana-Contempt case No. 848 ot 2022 in WP.No.63Al2022 fited by p.Sravya D/o Late P.Ramaiah, Typist, ZPP, Medchal, Medchal Mandal, Malkajgtri District and 22 others - Interim direction passed ir the W.p. for considering the petttioners'request for relaxation of rules for acquiring the Typewriting English and Teluc u Higher Grade -Examined - Speaking orders - Issued.

¶58

Ref:

¶59

G.O.Ms.No.969, G.A (Sers.A) Deptt., dt.27-10-1!95.

¶60

2.From the CPR & RE, Hyderabad, Lr.No.7604t4lCpR & RE/ Ct / t\dt / 2o2o, Dt.o4.o2.2027.

¶61

1. Govt. Memo.No.MZET-pRRD/ Ll 29 / At / ZO2, dt.09,. 03. 202 1.

¶62

From the Hon'ble High Court, Interim crders dt. 06.O1 .2022 in I.A. No.1 of ZO22 in Wp.No.638 <y 2022.

¶63

From the G.p for Services.II (T.S), Hicttr Court, Hyderabad C.C.No.848 of 2022 in Wp.No.638/2C22.

¶64

From the CPR & RE, Hyderabad, Lr. No.760414lCpR & RE/ Cl / M dt / 2020, Dt.07 .o7 .2022.

¶65

P.Sravya, Typist O/o Zpp Medchal, Malakajgiri tV< dchal District and 22 other Typists working in ZppSlMpps have filed \V.p.No.638 of 2022 in the Hon'ble High Court for relaxation of rules to acquire the typewriting qualification duly amending the relevant rules and redesignate the post of Typist as Assista nt-cu m -Com p utt: r operator, as was done in the similarly sttuated cases of other Departrr lnts.

¶66

,.'.

)

SN. J wP t.l02l 2021

In the reference 4th cited, the Hon'ble High Court in its interim directions dt.6.01.2022 in IA No.1 of 2022 in WP.No.63B of 2022 has passed the following orders;

¶72

"Pending consideration of the writ petition, the 2''r respondent is directed to consider the letter dt.04.02.2021 stated to have been addressed by the Commissioner of Panchayat Raj & Rural Development to the 2'd respondent."

¶73

The CPR & RE, Hyderabad in his letter 2'd cited, has furnished that the Telangana Panchayat Raj Ministeriat Association State unit and 26 Typists from Ranga Reddy district and 14 Typists from Karimnagar District have submitted a representation submitting that, most of the typists have completed reasonable years of service in the cadre of typist and due to lack of faculty to impart the proper training, lack of availability of typewriting institutions in Rural Areas and prolonged office hours in addition to attending to their family problems, they could not acquire Type Writing qualification and they continue to be as a temporary employees without regularizing their services and also deprived for further promotion as Senior Assistant. Moreover, after rapid usage of computers in Panchayat Raj Institutions, only computers are being used in the offices. Hence. they requested that appropriate relief should be given to them.

¶74

The CPR & RE, Hyd has further stated that, as seen from the representation and reports of the Chief Executive Officers, Zilla Praja Parishads, Rangareddy and Karimnagar districts, it is observed that, 26 Typists from Rangareddy district and 14 Typists from Karimnagar district who are appointed on Compassionate Grounds on conditional basis have not acquired the Pre-requisite qualification prescribed in the rules so far though the extended time allowed of four years in the appointment orders is already elapsed.

¶75

The matter having been examined, it is not correct to say that the typewriting institutions are closed or not available. In fact the petitioners of erstwhile Rangareddy District are close to Hyderabad city and there is no shortage of typewriting institutions. Further most of these petitioner were appointed in 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 colleagues who were working in the same District have appeared

SN. J \,t,t4021 2021

/^passed the typing exam whereas the petitioners he ve merely cited excuses.

¶80

In this connection, as per para 2(vii) of G.O.l'1s.No.612, G.A. ( Ser.A) Dept., dt.30.10.1991, it has been ordered hat where Typewriting is,ln essential qualification to a post th,_. candidate who do not possess these qualifications may be con:,idered for appointment to such categories of posts under the ;cheme of compassionate appointments, subject to the conditiol that they should acquire such qualification within two years rfter such appointment,

¶81

7 In the reference 1't cited, Government have issrred orders that, in cases of dependent of the deceased C;overnment employees, who do not possess the minimum EJucational qualification or^-fypewriting qualification prescribed for t1c post to which they are appointed with a condition to acqutre such requisite qualification within the stipulated period prescribed in the Government orders, fail to acquire such requisite cualification 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 gracer period to acquire such requisite Educational or Typewriting qr alification prescribed for the post to which they were appointed.

¶82

As per the above G.O., "if the candidates concern:d fails to acquire the requisite educational or Type-writing qu. lifications even within th€r extended grace period, then he/sh€ may be considered for appointment for a lower post such as ar Attender where such eclucational or Typewriting qualificatiorr is not prescribed and accordingly he/she may be appointed ir a lower post such as an Attender as if he/she is a fresh candiCate, after obtaining the willingness of the candidate. If he/she is r ot willing to take the lower post it shall be treated that ther: are no compelling reasons of poverty and such candidate be ,J scharged from service.'

¶83

The appointments to the applicants as Typist hrve been made on compassionate grounds and appointed conditio rally with a condition to ilcquire Typewriting English Higher an J Telugu Higher within a period of (2) years from the date of apf ointme;t as per Cir. Memo. No.60681/Ser.A/2003-1, GAD, dt.1i|.08.2003. Further some otl-rer conditionally appointed typists who rave been

SN, J wt, t4023 2023

) '\ l \

appointed on similar conditions with^petitioners, have already acquired the Typewriting English Higher and Telugu Higher skills.

¶88

The applicants in WP,No,63a/2O22 appointed as Typists in ZPPSIMPPS on Compassionate Grounds on conditional basis during the years of 2016l2Ot7 /2OLa and they should pass quatification of Typewriting Telugu 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 appointment, the Petitioners have given undertaking on conditional^grounds to acquire the requisite qualification within the time prescribed, but failed to acquire the skills.

¶89

In light of the above and in compliance to the interim orders of the Hon'ble High Court, the^proposal for relaxation of rules in respect of P.Sravya, Typist, ZPP, Medchal, Medchal Mandal Malkajgiri District and 22 other Typists, for acquiring the typewriting qualification English and Telugu Higher Grade duly amending the relevant^rules and re-designate the post of Typist as Assistant cum Computer operator, has been examined and the same^is not feasible for consideration as per^{para (6)} of c.O.Ms,No.969, G.A(Sers.A) Dept., dt.27-LO-t995., and accordingly the request is hereby rejected.

¶90

The Director, PR&RE, Hyderabad and Chief Executive Officer, Vikarabad/Ranga Reddy/Medchal-Malkajgiri are therefore requested to take further necessary action as^{per para (6)} of G.O.Ms.No.969, G.A(Sers.A) Dept., dt.27-10-1995, in the^matter accordingly and also requested to serve these orders to the petitioners concerned and send the served copies to the Government immediately.

¶91

Sd/-x x x SANDEEP KUMAR SULTANIA SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT.

¶92

(B) This Court Dassed tnte der dated

¶93

O7.O6.2O23 obs rvrn o as under:

¶94

¶95

SN. J wP 14023 2023

¶96

"Notlce before admission

¶97

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

¶98

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

¶99

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

¶100

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted :hat the petitioners are all graduates in computer science and h;rve been appointed as^-Iypists on compassionate grounds. He submitted that due to lack oF Typewriting institutions, the petitioners ltave not been able to acquire the qualification of Typewriting w thin the time granted and therefore, they have sought relaxatior of the said condition However, their request has been reject€d and a show cause notice has been issued to revert them to tre lower posts. Challenging the same, the writ petitions have been iled.

¶101

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted lat vide G.O.Ms.No.1 dated 04.01.2022, the covernment of^-r,rlangana itself has relaxed the condition oF obtaining the qualiFi|ation oF Typewriting in English and Telugu in respect oF similarl/ placed candidates in the BC Welfare Department.

¶102

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

¶103

Learned counsel for the respondents seeks time lcr filing cou nter.

¶104

List on 21. C6.2023

¶105

Till such time, there shall be interim suspension of the impugned orde r. "

¶106

The said orders granted in favour of the petitio rer had been extended pending further orders yide orders of this court dated 21.06.2023.

¶107

DIScussON AN DC NC LUSION:

(

SN. J wP_I4021 2023

The learned counsel appearing on behalf^of the^petitioners contends that the subject^{issue is squarely covered by the order} of this Court dated^{14.08.2019passed in W.P.No. L7321 of 2Ol9} the orders dated 16.04.2021^{passedin W.P.No.1796of 2020and} also the Division Bench^{Judgmentof this Courtdated 25.07.2024} passed in 28391 of 2Ol4 and also the Judgment of this^Court dated 28.06.2023^{passedin W.P.No.13595 of 2027.}

¶113

The learned Standing Counsel appearing^{on behalfof the} respondents does not dispute^{insofar as the relief extendedto} other similarly situated^persons as^{in the petitioners'case but} contends that the said relief^{had not beeh extended to those} employees working in^{PanchayatRaj and Rural Development} Department. The learned counsel^{appearing on behalF of the} petitioners disputes the same and^places reliance on^the Judgment dated 16.04.2021^{passed in W.P.No.17966of 2O2O} where under the^{petitioners dischargedthe duty as Typists in the} office of Chief Executive^{Officer, Zilla Parishad, Kakinada,East} God a va ri.

¶114

The oex Cou in the ludoment dated 22.11.¹⁹⁸⁸ Dasse ln civil A^DD ealN os.3² L2oJL^{979.32L4 ol1979}

¶115

SN, J wP t4021 2023

¶116

¶117

and 18 of 19 79 in Shri H.L. Trehan and others Versus Unionofln dia and Others at Dara No.13 obse ed as u nder:

¶118

"The view that has been taken by this C(,urt in the above, observation is that once a decision has brten taken, there is a tendency to uphold it and a represertation may not yield any fruitful purpose. Thus, even if ary hearing was given to the employees of CORIL after the r: suance of the impugned circular, that would not be any ctmpliance with the rules of natural justice or avoid the rrischief of arbitraries as contemplated by Article 14 of the Constitution. The High court, in our opinion, was perfectly justified in quashing the impugned circular,,.

¶119

In the said judgment it was observed at parc-r No.13 once a decision has been taken, the said decision has to t e upheld and the said decision should be extended to other sinr larly situated individuals and the same cannot be denied art,ltrarily in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

¶120

A bare perusal oF the record clearly indicates that with regard to junior Stenographers who had been appoirrted between 05.03.1987 and 14.07 .1998, a relaxation had b,een provided from acquiring qualification of Typewriting and Shor:hand Higher Grade as per G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 29.OZ.2OOB. Similarly,

l ..1

SN, J wP t4021 2021

G.O.Ms.No.68, dated 11.03.2010 as borne on record filed as material document by the petitioners in support of the petitioners'case also indicates a similar relief in respect of Junior Accountants appointed on compassionate grounds conditionally and are working in T & A service as on 27.10.2007.

¶125

The Division Bench of this Court in its Judqm ent dated 14.O8.2019 assed in W.P. No. 113 2L ot 20L9 dealino with a case ertaini^q to ora nt of relaxation from aco rrrno Tvoe Writino oualification, ob rved as nder:

¶126

"In the above background, now the issue that emerges for consideration of this Court is :

¶127

"Whether the order passed by the Tribunal is sustainable and tenable and whether the same warrants any interference oF this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India "?

¶128

It is no doubt true that, pursuant to the unfortunate death of the respondent's husband, while working as Senior Assistant, the a pplica n t- respondent 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

wP r10r3-:fii

necessary qualification, as per the said condition. It is not in disputer that the applicant herein is a grzduate in Computers; and also possesses PGDCA and also;:ossesses Typewriting English Lower Grade qualificatior.' It is pertinent to note that the State Government granted relaxation in favour of certain class of emplo'r:es, vide G.O.Ms,No. 116, GA (Ser.B) Department dated 29.O2.2OOA, having noticed the non-existlnce of Typewriting training institutions. It is also not in controversv that in 2O1O al the Government qranted relaxation from acquirinq TvD ewritinq oualifica tion in resDect of Treasurv DeDartm ent. The Tribunal also noted about the non-existence of Typewriting training institutions and the usage of Computers n all the offices. The reality remains that. apart from tlr: degree qualiFication in Computers, the applicant possess€ s PGDCA also. It is not the case of the respondents her.ein that the applicant has not dascharged her duties_properlv Grade due to the lack of TvDewritinq Hioher q ual ification.

¶133

A perusal of the order passed by the Tri )unal, in clear and vivid terms, discloses that the Tribur al, after elaborately and meticulously considering variou; issues, including the relaxation given by the state Govern rent, by way of the above referred Governmental Orders. and also the present situation, with regard to the non-usag: of type machines and the usage of Computers, cam€ to the tha h n istenc f her Oondent authorities cannot be sustained",

)

t.l

SN. J wP 14021 2021

The said writ^{petitionfiled by the respondentshad been} dismissed upholding the^{order dated 06.11.2017passedby the} Andhra Pradesh^{Administrative Tribunal in OA. No. 1856 of 2017} whereunder the Tribunal^{had directed to considerthe caseof the} applicants in O.A.^{No. 1856 of 2077 for relaxation of acquiring} the Typewriting^{qualiFicationand English Higher Gradeand} Telugu Lower Grade.

¶139

L2. Int e recen Division Bench Judoment^{of this} ou rt dated 2s.o7.2024^{oassed inW.P.No. 28391 of2(Jt4} dealin o with a identica situation at^{DaraNos.7 to 12} t ts observed as u der:

¶140

*7. The learned Government^{Pleader further contended} that the Tribunal^{has failed to appreclate the fact that the} relaxation from^{passingthe typewriting and shorthand} higher^grade in^{Telugu given vide G.O.Ms.No.116, GA (Ser-} B) Department, dated^{29.O2.2008 is applicableonly to the} Junior Stenographers^{appointed between 05.03.1987and} 14.O-/.lgg8, but not to^{the Typists and so also one time} exemption was^{granted vide G.O.Ms.No.783,Fin. (Admn'lII)} Department, dated^{31.12.2001toJuniorAssistantsin} Treasuries and Accounts^{Department frompassing} typewriting English^{higher gradebecausethesaid} qualification was not^prescribed ln any^{other Departmentsto} the equivalent category^{of Junior Accountants,however, said}

¶141

¶142

SN, 'I \ I' I{02-t 2{)2-l

¶143

exemption cannot be extended to the Typ sts, whose services are governed under A.P. Ministerial Servir e Rules.

¶144

The learned Government Pleader l-; d further contended that the Tribunal has not appreciated tlre fact that one time relaxation accorded vide G.O.Ms.No.58. Finance (Admn,III) Department, dated 11.03.2010 fro n passing typewriting English higher grade is applicable cnly to the Junior Acr:ountants, but not to the Typist catelory. It is further contended that respondent no.1 was given notice in the year 2003 and two more years were extendel to acquire required qualification, but he could not acquire 1[re same in ten years and that respondent no.1 cannot tlame the Department for not initiating timely action agains: him, and therefore, the petitioners have rightly issued thr: impugned show-cause notice dated 09.O2.2012 and the^(; )vernment Orders referred to above cannot be made applic,)ble to the case of the respondent no.1 and prayed to set aside the order oated 09.07.2013 passed by the Tribunal and allow the writ petition.

¶145

Admittedly, respondent no.1 was te.yrporarily appointed as Typist on compassionate grounds with a condition to acquare the requisite qualific; tion i.e., typewriting Higher in both Telugu and English within two years vide proceedings dated 28.11.2OO:-, but the respondent no.1 did not acquire the said requisite qualification within the time stipulat:d. The respondent no.1 submitted representation on 06.1O.20O3 to extend two more years to acquire the said qualification. Though, the grace perio J of two more years w.e.l. 27.12.2003 to 27.L2.2')OS was

t' )

SN. J wP t4021 2021

.l{

granted to the respondent no.1 vade proceedings dated 07.OL.zOO4, he did not acquire the said qualafication. However, the petitioners did not take any action even after expiry of grace period granted to the respondent no.l for acquiring the requisite qualification and kept quiet for a period of sax years after grace period and continued the respondent no.1 for more than six years later and issued show-cause notice only on O9.O2.2012. After having continued the respondent no.l for more than a decade and having utilized his services as Typist for such long period, the petitioners cannot ask the respondent no.l to 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 higher grade both in Telugu and English.

¶151

Furthermore, as per the G.O.Ms.No.116. dated 29.O2.2O08, the Government had granted exemption to the individuals from passing typewriting and shorthand higher grade in Telugu and subsequently, the same benefit was extended to the Junior Accountants of Treasuries and Accounts vide G.O.Ms.No.6g, dated 11.03.2010.

¶152

Perusal of the impugned order dated Og.O7.2Ot3 would disclose that the Tribunal on due consideration of G.O.Ms.No.116, dated 29.OZ.2OOB 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 Og.O2.2Ol2

¶153

¶154

SN. J \P r402i 102.1

¶155

issued by the 3'd petitioner herein as improper and thus, declared the same as illegal.

¶156

L2. In view of the above discussion and fa:ts of the case, this Court rs of the considered view that having continued the respondent no.1/applicant for such I tng period as L.D. Typist and having utilized his services for such period, issuing impugned show-cause noti,:e dated 09.02.2012 to revert the applicant to a lower p<.st after a long lapse of period would be unjust. Therefore, nterfering with the settled position after lapse of a decade is not feasible at this point of time and is contrary lrr the well established principles of equity and justice. Thus, rve are not inclined to interfere with the order of the Tribunal passed in O.A.No.10BB of 20L2 with VMA No.557 of 2012".

¶157

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

¶158

L4. Takino into consideration:

¶159

(a) The aforesaid facts and circumsta nces of the

¶160

case,

¶161

(b) The submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, 1:he learned

¶162

¶163

Sn-- J u'P tlotl 2021

¶164

¶165

Assistant Government^{Pleader and the learned Standing}

¶166

Counsel, appearing^{on behalf of respondents,}

¶167

¶168

(d) The contents of the order^{impugneddated} Lg.O7.2022 issued by^{the 1'trespondent and the} subsequent show cause^{notice dated 2O.03'2O23 served} upon the^{petataoner on O1.O4.2023,}

¶169

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

¶170

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

¶171

(S) The Division Bench Judgment^{dated 14'O8'2O19} passed in W.P. No. 11321 of^{2019 (referredtoand} extracted above)'

¶172

(.h) The order dated 15.O4.2O21^{passed in W'P' No'} L7g66 ot 2O2O which^{had been imptemented in respectof} the petitioner thereunder,

¶173

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

st. l wt,t402-l l0ti

The writ petition is allowed as prayr:d for. The impugned Memo No. PRRD-MZETll/29/2021, dated L9.O7.2O22 of the l't respondent is set asde and the subsequent show cause notice dated 20.03.2023 of the 3'd respondent is set aside. The respondents are directed to reconsider the request of the petitioners for rergularization of services of the petitioners with effect fronr petitioners joining duty as Typist and also consider the r€quest of the petitioners for release of all consequential bt:nefits, such as seniority, pay fixation and other allied benr:fits without insisting for passing of technical qualification of Typewriting Higher grade both in Telugu and English duty taking into consideration the order passed by Division Bench of this Court dated 14.08.2019 in W.P. l!o. 11321 of 2O19, the order dated L6.O4.2OZ[ passed in W.P. No. L7966 of 2O2O, the order dated O2.O9.2O14 p:rssed an O.A. No. 22O1 of 2OL4, G.O.Ms.No.1, dated O4.OL.2O22 and the recent Division Bench order dated 25.07.2Oi14 passed in W.P. No. 28391 ol 2OL4 and pass appropriate orders in accordance to law, in conformity with principles of natural justice by providing an opportunity of person al hearing to

)

SN. J uP tJ02l 2021

the petationers, within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and duly communicate the decision on the subject issue to the petitioners. However,

¶182

there shall be no order as to costs.

¶183

The miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶184

.K.BHAVANI SWAMY S ISTANT^REGISTRAR

¶185

,/TRUE^COPY// SECTION^OFFICER

¶186