APHC010427112012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 5424/2012 Between: Challa Gopal and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The Government Of Andhra Pradesh Finance Department and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P RAGHAVENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P RAJESWARI 2. G MADHUSUDHAN REDDY 3. GP FOR FORESTS 4. GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The petitioners are challenging the inaction on the part of the respondents in regularizing their services from the date of completion of 5 years of service without insisting for completion of 5 years of service as on the cut-off date i.e., 25.11.1993 prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners virtually online submits that the petitioners were appointed through employment exchange and attended the interview conducted by the respondent board. The petitioners were appointed vide proceedings dated 15.12.1989 on daily wages. The G.O.Ms.No.212 entitled the regularization of employees who completed 5 years as on 25.11.1993 the petitioners could not meet the requirement of completion of 5 years by the cut-off date as they were appointed only on 15.12.1989. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the other similarly placed employees who were appointed in the year 2001 on a contract basis were regularized. It is also submitted that the said facility was not extended. 4. This Court vide order dated 27.04.2012 directed the respondents to pay the minimum time scale applicable to the regular employees working as Field Assistants in the respondent board, pending further orders. During the pendency of the writ petition both the petitioners have attained the age of superannuation and on 30.09.2019 it was informed to the Court that the 1st petitioner working on outsourcing basis after his retirement. 3 5. The issue of regularization of an employee by the respondent board would completely be dependent on the existing vacancy and the requirement for filling up the said vacancy. The petitioners having been appointed on daily basis cannot seek for regularization as a matter of Fundamental Right when there is no existing vacancy. The petitioners were paid the minimum time scale by a direction of this Court. During the pendency of the writ petition as both the writ petitioners have attained the age of superannuation an order directing the respondents to regularize their services cannot be passed on account of efflux of time. 6. With these observations, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 09.01.2025 PNS