K V RAMANA Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the writ petitions are similar in all respects. Hence, they are disposed of through a common order.

(2.) THE petitioners are said to have been engaged as N.M.Rs. between 1982 and 1985 by the then Tirupathi Municipality, which, later became Tirupathi Municipal Corporation, respondent No.2 herein. Complaining that their services were terminated on various dates between 1984 and 1987, they filed R.P. Nos.21689 to 21698 of 1989 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short 'the Tribunal'). An interim order was passed by the Tribunal on 11.8.1989 directing that the case of the petitioners shall be considered for appointment on N.M.R. basis in accordance with the existing Rules and Regulations. In compliance with the interim order, the petitioners were reinstated into service on 6.9.1989 as per the resolution, dated 31.8.1989. THEreafter, R.Ps. were disposed of on 29.9.1994, taking on record, the fact that the petitioners were appointed as N.M.Rs. and directing that their cases be considered for regularization in terms of G.O. Ms. No.212, dated 22.4.1994.

(3.) THE petitioners contend that though they came to be reinstated into service on the basis of an interim order passed by the Tribunal, the legality of the termination of their services in contravention of Section 25-F of the Act remains untouched and the dispute can certainly be raised under Section 2-A(2) of the Act.