Telangana High Court
WP/25507/2003 of Ch. Satyanarayana, S/o. Samba Murthy Vs The Managing Director, on 28 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 25507 of 2003 Between: Ch. Satyanarayana, S/o. Samba Murthy Rajamundry, East Godavari
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO
WRIT PETITION NO : 25507 of 2003
Between:
Ch. Satyanarayana, S/o. Samba Murthy Rajamundry, East Godavari Dist.
AND
..... PETITIONER
1. The Managing Director,
Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd.
Dabagardens, Visakhapatnam.
2. The Superintending Engineer
3. The Divisional Engineeer,
Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd. Rajamundry, East Godavari Dist.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toissue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaringthe action of the respondents particularly the action of the 3rd respondent in nottaking further steps to regularise my service on the basis of the LR. No.AAO.FRO.RL.RJY.JAO.i. U2.D. No. 1442/2002 dated 19-2-2002 of the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and issue consequentialdirection to the respondents to regularise my services with all consequential benefitsand pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.THOTARAMAKOTESWARA RAO
Counsel for the Respondents : SMT.E.URMILA, SC FOR EPDC LTD.
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.
ORAL ORDER:
Heard both sides and at their request the writ petition itself is taken up fordisposal.
The petitioner herein, employee of the respondents, filed this writ petition,inter alia, seeking a writ of Mandamus for regularization of his services on the basisof the recommendations made by the 2[nd] respondent herein on 19.2.2002.
The case of the petitioner in brief is that though earlier he sought a relief onthe basis of the B.P.M.S.Nos.36 and 37 dated 18.5.1997, the same was notconsidered. But, however, his case has been independently recommended throughthe proceedings dated 19.2.2002 by the Assistant Accounts Officer and in spite ofthe same, the matter was kept pending without passing any orders.
Having heard the submissions made on either side and on perusal of thematerial on record, I am of the opinion that in view of the recommendation made infavour of the petitioner, there cannot be any hitch for the respondents to consider thecase of the petitioner.
The writ petition is accordingly allowed directing the respondents 2 and 3 toconsider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his services, in terms of the recommendations made by the Assistant Accounts Officer on 19.2.2002 and passorders on merits in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
28.12.2004
CVM
To
1. The Managing Director,
Eastern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd.
Dabagardens, Visakhapatnam.
2. The Superintending Engineer
3. The Divisional Engineeer, Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd. Rajamundry, East Godavari Dist. Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd. Rajamundry, East Godavari Dist.
4. 2 CDs.
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO