Telangana High Court
WP/9966/2005 of A. Venkataramaiah, Vs Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, on 31 December 2007
SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.9966 of 2005 Dated:31.12.2007 Between A.Venkataramaih ..Petitioner and 1. APSRTC rep, Managing Director Musheerabad, Hyderabad and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.9966 of 2005 ORDER: Learned counsel on either side
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU
W.P.No.9966 of 2005 Dated:31.12.2007
Between
A.Venkataramaih
and
..Petitioner
1. APSRTC rep, Managing DirectorMusheerabad, Hyderabad and others.
…Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.9966 of 2005
Learned counsel on either side fairlyconceded that the issue involved in this writ petitionis squarely covered by a Judgment of Apex Courtin Divisional Manager, APSRTC and others v.P.Lakshmoji Rao[[1]] wherein it was observed asunder:“In view of this peculiar situation and inorder to avoid the anomalies that mightotherwise ensue, while we hold that therespondent-employees have failed toestablish their legal right to get the status ofregular employees right from the date of theirinitial appointment on daily wage basis andthe respective dates of regularizationassigned to the respondents cannot belegally faulted, we are inclined to mould therelief in modification of the directions given inthe judgments under appeal and direct asfollows.
If any of the Conductors, junior to therespondents in the relevant seniority list ofthe concerned Division/Region, have got thebenefit of seniority and regularization OR areentitled to get the same by virtue of the judgments that have become final, then therespondents who are seniors to them, shallbe given the same benefit on the sameprinciple.”
Following the same, this writ petition is alsodisposed of. No costs.
__________
31-12-2007
rkk
[1]2004(3) ALD 1 (SC)