P.SRINIVAS RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief:

(2.) This Court has heard Sri T.S.Anand, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for School Education, appearing for the State.

(3.) The petitioner claims that he has been working as Night Watchman in the 4th respondent School. He has completed decades of service by the date of filing of the Writ Petition. He submits that all the conditions that are necessary for regularisation in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994 and G.O.Ms.No.112, dated 23.07.1997 are fulfilled by the petitioner and that despite the same he has not been regularised. Learned counsel also points out that when the proposals were initially sent for regularisation they were directed to be submitted through proper channel. Accordingly, he points out that the Deputy Educational Officer-3rd respondent has sent the proposal of the petitioner on 06.02.2017. Thereafter, learned counsel points out that a clarification was sought by the 2nd respondent and the 4th respondent had clarified that although the original appointment order of the petitioner was lost, all other supporting documents were submitted vide letter dated 28.06.2017. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 07.04.2017 the documents referred are once again submitted and that despite the same the services of the petitioner has not been regularised. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the proceedings issued to similarly placed schools to argue that the people holding the post of Watchman, Sweeper etc., have been absorbed into the regular posts. Therefore, learned counsel argues that the petitioner fulfils all the conditions that are necessary for observation. Hence, he prays for an order.