Telangana High Court
WP/16786/1999 of Shaik Hidayathulla, Vs Commissioner, on 29 December 2008
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION Nos.16786 and 17857 of 1999 WRIT PETITION No.16786 of 1999 Between: Shaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE,ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction)
PRESENT:THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNAREDDY
MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OFDECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY
WRIT PETITION Nos.16786 and 17857 of 1999
WRIT PETITION No.16786 of 1999
Between:
Shaik Hidayathulla and four others.
…
Petitioners
And
Commissioner, Rural development, 5[th] Floor,Insurance Buildings, Tilak Road, Abids,Hyderabad and two others.
… Respondents
WRIT PETITION No.17857 of 1999
Between:Kum.V.Mamatha Jessica.
…
Petitioners
And
Commissioner, Rural development, 5[th] Floor,Insurance Buildings, Tilak Road, Abids,Hyderabad and two others.
… Respondents
Counsel for the petitioners: Sri M.Srinivasa Rao.
(In both the cases)
Counsel for the respondents: None.
(in both the cases)
This Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
2
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.
-COMMON ORDER:
These two Writ Petitions are filed seekingregularization of the services of the petitioners in therespondent-Organization.
In view of the authoritative pronouncement of theConstitution Bench of the Supreme Court in State of Karnataka Vs. Umadevi[1)]and reiterated by a threeJudge Bench in Official Liquidator Vs. Dayanand and others[2)] the petitioners, who are working only on dailywage basis, have no legal right to seek regularization oftheir services unless the employer frames a scheme forsuch regularization.
Both the Writ Petitions are, therefore, dismissed.
------------------------------------
C.V.NAGARJUNA
REDDY,J
Date:29-12-2008MNR