K VARAHA NARASIMHULU Vs. REGISTRAR SRI VENKATESWARA UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the petitioners in this batch of writ petitions were appointed in the hostels that are being maintained by the respondent- University in various capacities such as servers, sweepers, helpers, watchmen, rice cleaners, Assistant Electricians, Assistant gas mechanic, store attenders, Assistant steward, matrons, games boy, cleaners and gardeners from 1982 and they are working on daily wage basis for all these years. The first petitioner in W.P. No.25598 of 1997 was appointed as Junior Assistant on 20-11-1985. Except petitioners 6,9,13,14,15,16,17,18 and 20 in W.P. No.3391 of 1998, the other petitioners 94 in number, were appointed prior to 25-11-1993. As these petitioners were appointed after cut-off date in temporary appointment i.e., after 25-11-1993 under Section 3 of Act 2 of 1994, I cannot give any relief to them in this case. The Writ Petition No.3391 of 1998 in so far as the petitioners 6, 9,13,14,15,16,17,18 md 20 namely A. Venkatamuni, K. Manikantan, T. Venkatesh, T. Srinivasulu, S. Munikrishna, S. Rajul Reddy, G. Ramachandraiah, A. Umapathi and P. Balaji respectively is dismissed.

(2.) The case of the petitioners in these writ petitions is that the respondent- University was appointing them for 89 days at a time and after giving one day break they are being re-appointed since 1982 onwards. It is also their case that though they are working for more than a decade, the respondents have not shown any inclination to regularise their services and pay the time-scales. After issuance of G.O.Ms. No.212 dated 22-4-1994 wherein the scheme was framed to regularise the services of the temporary employees, the Government seemed to have called for the particulars of the employees whose cases will fall under the above G.O. and the University seemed to have sent proposals in their letter No.l729/UE-I-l/94/95 dated 20-11-1995. But the Government in its letter dated 22-11-1995 rejected the request of the University on the ground that those petitioners are being paid from the hostel funds and they cannot be brought into the University services as per the scheme envisaged in G.O.Ms. No.212. Questioning the said letter, some of the employees filed W.P.No.26054 of 1995 and this Court by order dated 13-8-1997 held that when it is admitted that the hostels are established and maintained by the University, the University cannot refuse to treat the employees working in the hostels as employees of the University and accordingly the letter of the Government dated 22-11-1995 was set .aside and a direction was given to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for regularisation of their services and to pay them regular time-scales of pay in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Haryana vs. P.R. Singh forthwith and the respondents were given four weeks of time to comply with the orders. The respondent- University instead of regularizing the services of the temporary employees tried to fill up as many as 190 existing vacancies by issuing a notification. In those circumstances while the petitioners in W.P. No.26054 of 1995 filed C.C. 830 of 1998 and other temporary employees filed these writ petitions on various dates and obtained interim orders for their continuance. While admitting the Contempt Case by order dated 13-7-1998 I directed the Registrar of the S.V. University as well as the Principal Secretary to the Government, Higher Education to appear in the Court. The Registrar of the S.V. University having appeared in the Court on 10-8-1998 submitted that he sent proposals to the Government_on 14-10-1997 and the same is pending with the Government.

(3.) In the counter filed on behalf of the Principal Secretary to the Government, Higher Education it is stated that the proposal of the University was examined in consultation with the Finance and Planning Department as its concurrence is necessary and the Finance and Planning Department informed them that in the absence of clear vacancies it is not possible to consider the proposal of the Registrar of the said University. Finance and Planning Department further stated that regular scales of pay attached to the posts are contingent upon regularisation and as such payment of regular pay at the level of minimum scale is also not possible. In those circumstances the proposal was rejected by the Government in its letter No.l729/VE-I/ 1/95 dated 27-7-1998.