APHC010565222024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION No.29564 OF 2024 Between: 1. Kanikella Arjun Singh, S/o K. Anand Rao, Aged about 30 years, Occ Casual Labour, R/o 1-66, Ambedkar Nagar, S. Achitapuram, Kakinada Rural, East Godavari District. 2. M. Siva Prasad, S/o Syma Sundara Sarma Aged about 50 years, Occ. Casual Labour, R/o Baburu Village, Ramateertham (Post), Vidavalur (Mandal), SPSR Nellore District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The Union of India, Ministry of Culture, New Delhi, Rep. by Secretary 2. The Archaeological Survey of India, 24 Tilak Marg, New Delhi -110011, Rep. by its Director General 3. The Superintending Archaeologist, Archaeological Survey of India, Amaravathi Circle, 6/134-1 Aurobindo Plaza, Near Andhra Bank, Kanur Main road, Vijayawada - 520007, Krishna District. 4. Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, at Hyderabad. Rep. by its Registrar ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners : Mr.G.Seena Kumar Counsel for the Respondents: Learned Deputy Solicitor General 2 WP_29564_2024 The Court made the following ORDER: (per Hon’ble NJS,J) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr.Neetu Kumar, learned counsel representing the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India representing the respondents. 2. Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 15.3.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad in O.A. No.533 of 2022, the applicants therein filed the present writ petition. In the said O.A., the applicants sought the following relief: “… … to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the representation dt.31-01-2022 & 10-06-2022 for grant of payment of minimum wages with 1/30th status + dearness allowance as per the OM dt.26-12-2016 is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory violating of Article 14 & 16 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to extend the benefit of payment of minimum wages to the applicants with 1/30 status i.e. Rs. 18000/- + dearness allowance as per the OM dt.26-12-2016 and as per the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench in OA No.020/00214/2021, dt.30-09-2021 and OA No.063/00364/2018 dt.07-12-2018 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 3. The learned Tribunal, after considering the submissions made on behalf of both sides, was not inclined to grant the relief sought for and dismissed the said O.A., along with O.A. No.285 of 2022 and batch, vide order dated 15.3.2024. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners, while making submissions with reference to the various contentions raised in the writ petition, had 3 WP_29564_2024 drawn the attention of this Court to the orders passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Telangana in Writ Petition No.24075 of 2024, dated 02.9.2024. He submits that the said writ petition filed by the applicant in O.A. No.285 of 2022, was disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioners to submit detailed representations and the respondents are directed to examine the same with reference to the Office Memorandum, dated 07.6.1988. He submits that the present writ petition may be disposed of with a similar direction. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel representing the respondents though sought to advance arguments with reference to the submissions made in the counter affidavit, however had not disputed about the orders in Writ Petition No.24075 of 2024 passed in similar circumstances. 6. This Court, having gone through the order dated 02.9.2024 in Writ Petition No.24075 of 2024 and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, deems it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with similar directions. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioners to submit a detailed representation seeking the benefits of Office Memorandum, dated 07.6.1988 and also for fixation of pay, preferably within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such representation, the respondents are directed to examine the case of the petitioners as to whether they are entitled for the benefit in terms of the said Office Memorandum and also whether they are similarly situated like the applicants in O.A. No.99 of 2022 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with Law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said representation. 4 WP_29564_2024 No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, including I.A. No.2 of 2024, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J _____________________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J October 07, 2025 vasu