WP/6827/2026 of J MALLESWARAIAH Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 23 July 2026

1. J MALLESWARAIAH, S/0. J.CV. SUBBANNA, AGED 57 YEARS, OCC WORKSHOP ATTENDANT ( ON CONTRACT), GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC FOR MINORITIES, B.TANDRAPADU, KURNOOL. R/0. H.NO. 86-462, LEPAKSHI NAGAR ( LN) 335 A F C I COLONY, KURNOOL, A.P.

...PETITIONER AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING (TE) DEPARTMENT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AMARAVATI, A.P.

2. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, A. P.

3. REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, S.V.U. REGION, TIRUPATI.

4. PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC FOR MINORITIES, B.THANDRAPADU, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT, A.P.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate writ Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondent No.2 passed Speaking Order vide. Memo. No. 23696 of 2024/2025. Dated 15- 01-2026 rejected the claim of the petitioner for Regularization of service of the petitioner as Workshop Attendant on contract basis as per the The Regularization of services of contract Employees Act 2023 (Act 30 of 2023), the Government issued Orders vide. G.O.Ms.No.114 Finance (HR.I,Pig and policy) Department dated. 21-10-2023, while considered the cases of similarly situated 24 other contract employees, who have been appointed from 2011 by the 2nd Respondents by orders vide G.O.Ms.No.8, dated. 16- 03-2024, without any valid reasons as being arbitrary, illegal, unjust and violation Articles 14,16,and 21 of the Constitution of India and human rights besides being violation of principles of rule of law and opposed to all principles of canons of norms of norms of law and justice and contrary to the principles of law laid down by the Honble High of Andhra Pradesh in writ petition Masu Meeramma w/o Srinivasulu and ors VS State of A.P. , Director of Public health and Family welfare Department and ors dated. 06-11-2024 (2024 Lawsuit(AP) 993, 2025(1) ALD 70,and W.P.Nos.30588 of 2018 and batch, dated. 14- 02-2024, and set aside the Impugned Speaking Order issued by the 2nd Respondent, and direct the 2nd Respondent to Regularize the service of the petitioner as Workshop Attendant with from 02-06- 2014 and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct Respondent No. 2 consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of his service as workshop attendant pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. N B CHANDRA SEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Writ Petition No.6827 of 2026 O R DE R:

1. The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in not regularizing the services of the Petitioner in terms of Andhra Pradesh Regularization of Service of Contract Employees, Act – 2023 (Act No.30 of 2023), as illegal and arbitrary.

2. The Petitioner was appointed/working as Workshop Attendant on contract basis vide proceedings, dated 27.08.2011 pursuant to a Public Notification issued by the Respondent-Authorities. The Petitioner was selected and appointed through open process and had completed more than 15 years of service in the Respondent-Department in the same cadre. While so, the Respondent No.1 issued G.O.Ms. No.114 Finance (HR-I Plg & Policy) Department, dated 21.10.2023, based on the Andhra Pradesh Regularization of Services of Contract Employees Act, 2023 (for short, ‘Act, 2023’), proposing to regularize the services of the contract employeesvis-à-vis the clear vacancies existing as of

02.06.2014, whereunder regularization of individuals appointed on a contract basis was to be considered provided that the final appointment was in due compliance with the procedure relating to (i) Notification of Vacancies, (ii) Selection Process, and (iii) Rule of Reservation and eligibility, age, and Educational Qualifications prescribed for the post. The Petitioner claim for regularization in terms of the above Act, 2023. Hence, the present Writ Petition came to be filed.

3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner relies upon a Judgment of this Court in W.P. No.8827 of 2024 and batch in support of his contentions, wherein similarly placed employees were directed to be considered for regularization.

4. Sri S. Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submits that the case of the Petitioner for regularization is under active consideration at Government level and therefore, he contends that the present Writ Petition is premature.

5. Having heard the respective counsel and considering the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.8827 of 2024, the present Writ Petition is disposed of with the following direction:-

(i) The Respondent-Authorities are directed to consider the case of the Petitioner for regularization in terms of the Act 30 of 2023 on par with other contract employees as expeditiously as possible.

(ii) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 24.07.2026 chs

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

WRIT PETITION NO:6827/2026 Dt. 24.07.2026

chs