C PUSHPALATHA Vs. EXECUTIVE OFFICER TTD TRIUPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner working as Bill Clerk/Junior Assistant in the hostel attached to Sri Padmavathi Women's College (SPW College) since 1988 filed this wit petition in the year 1997 questioning the inaction on the part of the respondents in not regularising her services while conferring the said benefit to others working in the hostel.

(2.) This Court on 6-11-1997 while admitting the writ petition issued Notice to the respondents in WPMP No.12480 of 1997, in which the petitioner sought a direction to the respondents to consider her case for regularisation as Junior Assistant, pending disposal of the writ petition. Having received the Notice from this Court, the respondents stopped payment of salary due to the petitioner. In those circumstances, the petitioner filed WPMP No.44685 of 1998 and my learned brother B. Sudershan Reddy, J., by order dated 31-3-1999, having held that there is no justification whatsoever on the part of the respondents in not paying any salary whatsoever to the petitioner, directed the respondents to pay the entire arrears of salary payable to the petitioner within four weeks from that day and continue to pay the salary every month during the pendency of the writ petition. Having received the order dated 31-3-1999, from this Court, the respondents came up with an application WVMP No.2203 of 1999 seeking vacation of the said interim order.

(3.) The undisputed facts of this case are that the petitioner was appointed on 8-8-1988 as Bill Clerk, which was treated as a post on par with the Junior Assistant, by the Warden of SPW College hostel. Thereafter, the Hostel Committee, consisting of Principal, Warden, resident tutors and house managers, at the meeting held on 30-12-1988 resolved to regularise the services of the petitioner as Bill Clerk with effect from forenoon of 8-8-1988, the date on which she was appointed. The hostels attached to the Colleges run by Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) are treated as separate units and all the appointments and promotions were to be made by the Wardens with the prior approval of the Hostel Committees and in this case though the Warden appointed the petitioner on ad hoc basis, the Hostel Committee ratified the action of the Warden and regularised the services of the petitioner from the date of her appointment. Subsequently, it seems that the hostels were taken over by the TTD, in 1991. From the proceedings of the Executive Officer, respondent No.l herein, dated 21-6-1991, in Roc No.D8/28071/87 it is seen that the TTD Board in its meeting held on 19-12-1989 adopted a Resolution No.151 to release an amount of Rs.8,00,000 towards payment of differential wages to the hostel workers attached to three colleges namely SPW College, S.V. Arts College and SGS Arts College, that are being run by the TTD, including the hostel in which the petitioner is working. In another Resolution No.751 dated 1-12-1990, TTD Board resolved to regularise the service of the hostel workers in the TTD as a separate Unit. Pursuant to this Resolution, the Executive Officer seemed to have placed the proposals before the TTD and for regularisation of the services of the employees working in the hostels. At their meeting held on 3-6-1991 the TTD in its Resolution No. 192 resolved (i) to treat the hostel workers of the said three college hostels as separate unit; (ii) to ratify the appointments and promotions made by the Wardens of the hostels, as mentioned in Annexure-I enclosed therewith; (iii) to create 139 posts in various cadres in the hostels to regularise the hostel workers already working in the above hostels as shown in Annexure-II and (iv) to adopt the Rules relating to the method of recruitment, qualifications, age and pay-scales of the hostel workers on par with the similar posts in TTD. The method of recruitment rules of each cadre and the revised pay-scales of 1986 adopted to the cadres are noted against each column and is shown in Annexure-III enclosed therewith. The Board also authorised Chief Warden/Warden to appoint employees on temporary basis whenever there is need for additional staff to run the hostel with prior approval of the Hostel Committee and Executive Officer of the TTD. It is seen from Annexure-I the name of the petitioner was not found and the reason given by the respondents Counsel is that only the services of the hostel workers who are appointed prior to 1986 were included in that Annexure. When the TTD is not paying the minimum salary in the time scale of pay attached to the post, the petitioner seemed to have made a representation to the authorities concerned and with effect from 1-1-1992 she is being paid minimum pay in the time-scale of pay, but without extending other benefits. Subsequently, the TTD seemed to have regularised the services of some of the employees appointed much later to the petitioner and started paying the time-scale of pay attached to the posts. It is also not in dispute that some of the hostel workers, not covered by Resolution No. 192 dated 3-6-1991, approached this Court by filing WPNo.10873 of 1994 seeking regularisation of their services and payment of salary attached to the post and the same was allowed by order dated 22-1-1995, the TTD seemed to have carried the matter in appeal but without success. Thereafter, the Board seemed to have carried the matter to Supreme Court and as per the version of the Counsel for the TTD the relief was restricted only to the petitioners therein. Anyhow, I need not go into that controversy in deciding the issue before me.