A PESHETTY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions raise common questions of fact and law and hence I am disposing of all of them by this common judgment.

(2.) The petitioners in WPs.3537 of 1998, 34580 of 1997 and 34698 of 1997 are the watchmen/attenders. The slight difference in the designation of the petitioner in \VP 3526 of 1998 is watchman/office boy. The petitioner in WP 34825 of 1997 is the Junior Assistant.

(3.) The case of the petitioners is that they were appointed as daily wagers and they have worked for more than 5 years and as such they are entitled to be regularised under the G.O.Ms. No.2] 2, dated 22-4-1994, which came into force with effect from 25-11-1993. It is not in dispute that the petitioners services were retrenched and challenging those retrenchment orders the petitioners and others had earlier preferred writ petitions before this. Court in WP No.14740 of 1996 and batch and those writ petitions were disposed of by a ieamed single Judge of this Court by a judgment and order of this Court dated 3-7-1997. It is necessary to extract the operative portion of the said judgment which is as under: