WP/13016/2000 of Polaki Venkattarao, Vs The A.P.Transco, on 31 December 2008

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare theaction of the respondents in not considering the petitioner’s case forabsorption in terms of B.P.Ms.No.36, dated 18.05.1997, as illegal andarbitrary.

The petitioner has earlier filed Writ Petition No.19361 of 1997questioning the action of the respondents in not appointing him in thesuitable post in terms of the above-mentioned Board Proceedings. Inpursuance of the orders passed by this Court in the said writ petition andalso C.C.No.2118 of 1998, the petitioner’s case was re-considered andagain, rejected by impugned order, dated 01.01.2000 on the ground thatthe petitioner was not on the rolls as Village Electricity Worker as on18.05.1997, which is one of the essential requirements to be satisfied forabsorption in terms of B.P.Ms.No.36, dated 18.05.1997. In the affidavitfiled in support of the writ petition, the petitioner relied upon a xerox copyof the purported certificate, dated 28.04.2000 issued by the Sarpanch,Kothavalasa Gram Panchayat, wherein it was certified that the petitionerworked as a Village Electricity Worker of Kothavalasa Gram Panchayat,Rajam Mandal, Srikakulam District from 05.07.1989 till April, 2000.

In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it wascategorically stated that the report received from the Sarpanch ofKothavalasa Gram Panchayat in 1997 clearly revealed that thepetitioner was not attending to his duties for at least ten months prior toOctober, 1997 and that in view of cancellation of specific employmentscheme, reimbursement of wages (grant-in-aid) to the Village Electricity Workers was made only up to February, 1997. It was further stated thatverification of the records by the Divisional Operation, Srikakulam at theDivisional Office showed that the hand receipts for payment of grant-in-aid amount were received only up to February, 1997 and that the reportof the Assistant Divisional Engineer, Operation, Rajam, revealed thatO&M staff were attending the day-to-day works of Kothavalasa GramPanchayat which were hitherto attended to by the Village ElectricityWorkers.

Neither a reply affidavit is filed controverting the avermentsmentioned in the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents nor thelearned counsel for the petitioner is present to point out any illegalitycontained in the impugned order.

In view of the undeniable fact that one of the pre-requisites forabsorption is that the Village Electricity Worker must have been workingas on 18.05.1997 and that the petitioner failed to prove that he wasactually working as on that date except producing a xerox copy of thepurported certificate said to have been issued by the Sarpanch ofKothavalasa Gram Panchayat in 2000, the petitioner failed to make outany case for granting relief in this writ petition.

The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed.

As a sequel to dismissal of main petition, WPMP.No.16561 of2000 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.

C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

31[st] DECEMBER, 2008.

kvni