A SUDERSHAN Vs. APSEB HYD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks a writ, directing the respondents to absorb him in the post of L.D.C/Helper or in any other suitable post in terms of Memo.No.OSD(P)/DM.l/A3/l 138/ 85.1 dated26-8-1985 in the existing vacancies in the interests of justice etc.

(2.) The petitioner admittedly worked as casual labourer only for 106 days during the period21-8-1991 to 5-12-1991, more than six years after the said memo dated 26-8-1985 was issued. That memo dealt with the cases of ex-casual labourers, who worked in the Board prior to 1981 and really has no application to the petitioner. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of P.A.Choudary, J., in Writ Petition No. 10274 of 1986 and batch dated 10-3-1987. In that batch of writ petitions, the petitioners who worked as casual labourers during the years 1982,1983,1984,1985 and 1986 complained that they were excluded from the benefit of consideration for regular employment under Memo dated 26-8-1985 on the ground that it was limited to cases of ex-casual labourers who worked prior to 1981. The learned Judge held that the said memo was based on a policy adopted by the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board to recruit the ex-casual ..labourers into the services of the Board on a regular basis and that the benefits of such Si policy should not be denied to any ex-causal labourer, unless he had rendered himself ineligible for recruitment into the Board's services and that imposition of a blanket ban against all the ex-casual labourers of the year 1982 and the subsequent years could not be upheld. But now there is Andhra Pradesh (Regulation of Appointments to Public Services and Rationalisation of Staff Pattern and Pay Structure), Act, 1994 (Act No.2 of 1994) which prohibits daily wage appointments and regulates recruitment. Section 7 of that Act also bars regularisation of services of daily wage employees. It provides as follows:- (explanation not necessary) "1.Bar for regularisation of services:- No person who is a daily wage employee and no person who is appointed on a temporary basis under Section 3 and is continuing as such at the commencement of this Act shall have or shall be deemed ever to have a right to claim for regularisation of services on any ground whatsoever and the services of such person shall be liable to be terminated at any time without any notice and without assigning any reasons: Provided that in the case of Workmen falling within the scope of Section25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, one month's wages and such compensation as would be payable under the said section shall be paid in case of termination of services: Provided further that nothing in this section shall apply to the Workmen governed by Chapter V-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947". Section 9 of the Act provides for abatement of claims and is as follows:-

(3.) The writ petition istherefore dismissed. No costs.