Sri Mampakula Dayakar Reddy v. State of Telangana and 2 others
Case brief
What is this about?
Regularization of daily-wage employee (Office Subordinate; driver cadre per prayer) of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Open University; pension and retiral benefits; old pension scheme versus Contributory Pension Scheme (G.O.Ms.Nos.653, 654 & 655 dated 22.09.2004); G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance & Planning (FW.PC-III) dated 22.04.1994; G.O.Rt.No.166, Higher Education (UE) Department dated 18.06.2016 rejecting ratification of regularization as contrary to Act 2 of 1994; competent authority to ratify regularization is the State Government; relief denied for non-challenge of the rejection order; Article 14 Constitution of India; Article 226 petition; Section 151 CPC interim-relief applications; interim orders dated 18.09.2020 and I.A.No.1 of 2021 to vacate them; reference to W.P.No.8765 of 2015 (Sri M. Mallesh and others); writ petition dismissed without costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.
What did the court decide?
On a bare perusal of paragraph No.11 of the counter affidavit of respondent Nos.2 and 3, it is respondent No.1 who is the competent authority to ratify the regularization of the services of the petitioner; instead of ratifying the University's action under G.O.Ms.No.212 dated 22.04.1994, respondent No.1 rejected the proposals vide G.O.Rt.No.166, Higher Education (UE) Department, dated 18.06.2016, on the ground that the appointments were contrary to the provisions of Act 2 of 1994.