K. SRINIVAS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the cancellation of the appointments of the petitioners as Office Attendants/Lab Attendants by the respondent No.4 vide individual proceedings dtd. 26/9/2023, as bad in law and consequently to set aside the same and to hold that the petitioners are entitled to be treated and continued as regular Office Attendants/Lab Attendants pursuant to the office orders issued on 20/21/6/2023 with all consequential benefits and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice.

(2.) Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the respondent organization was initially known as Regional Engineering College and subsequently, in the year 2002-03 it has been converted into National Institute of Technology, Warangal. The petitioners are all working in the respondent's institute as daily rated employees from the past 15 to 30 years in different skilled and highly skilled jobs. The petitioners, who were engaged by the Regional Engineering College have been continued in the institute even after conversion as NIT on contract basis and the writ petitioners were making representations for regularization of their services.

(3.) It is submitted that when the respondents did not consider their requests for regularization of their services, the petitioners filed W.P.No.22427 of 2003 and 22846 of 2003 and this Court had disposed of the Writ Petitions by orders dtd. 4/10/2007 and 11/10/2007 directing the respondents to consider regularizing the services of the petitioners. It is submitted that when the directions of this Court were not complied with, the petitioners along with others, filed Contempt Case Nos.408 to 422 and 534 of 2009 and batch and this Court had disposed of the same vide order dtd. 4/4/2012 observing that the direction of the Court was subject to availability of sanctioned posts as well as permission of MHRD and since there were no sanctioned posts and also the permission of MHRD was not available, there was no willful disobedience on the part of the respondents.