1 APHC010424682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 24549/2025 Between: 1. P KAMALAMMA, W/O LATE P.V. CHANDRA SEKHARA RAO, AGED 64 YEARS, R/OD.NO. 13-274, RAMACHANDRA ROAD, KUPPAM URBAN, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS.. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE AND COOPERATION SERICULTURE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS.. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF SERICULTURE, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF SERICULTURE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2 5. THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF SERICULTURE, KUPPAM, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. TRIMOORTHY K G Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I 2. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.24549 of 2025 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed declaring the action of the Respondents in not regularizing the services of the Petitioner‟s husband late P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao on completion of five years of continuous service as stipulated in G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance and Planning (FW.PC.III) Department, dated 22.04.1994, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The Petitioner is the wife of late P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao. P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao was appointed as a full time contingent worker on 01.07.1980 by Respondent No.5. The husband of the Petitioner late P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao (hereinafter referred to as „P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao‟) had worked as a farm worker and continued in the department till his demise on 09.01.2006. It is the contention of the Petitioner that P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao was appointed in a regular vacancy and having requisite qualifications to be continued in the said post. While so, the Government of Andhra Pradesh had introduced G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994 regularising the 4 services of the individuals who were working continuously for a period of five years prior to the cut-off date on certain conditions. It is stated that as P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao had requisite qualifications, the Respondents ought to have considered his case for regularization. It is stated that similarly placed persons had filed W.P.No.4290 of 2020 and the same was disposed of by this Court directing the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioners for regularization with effect from 25.11.1993 and the said order was confirmed in W.A.No.483 of 2021. It is stated that the services of the Petitioners in those writ petitions have been regularized. As P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao is similarly placed and is entitled to be considered for regularization, the present writ petition is filed. 3. The Petitioner had given representations and as the same is not being considered, the present writ petition is filed. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that the case of P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao for regularization would be considered in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. 5. Heard the respective counsel. 5 6. The Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994 proposing to regularize the services of individuals who were continuously on duty as on the particular date. The obligation to regularize is on the Government and no application is required to be made by P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao. 7. Firstly, the G.O.Ms.No.212 enables the appointing authorities to regularise individuals who have completed five (5) years of minimum service as on 25.11.1993 on certain conditions. As mentioned supra, the obligation to regularise as per the G.O.Ms.No.212 is on the appointing authority, and their delay in taking action for the regularisation of P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao led to the death retirement of P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao and eventually his death. The relevant portion of the G.O.Ms.No.212 is extracted below: “Accordingly, Government after careful examination of the whole issue and in supersession of all previous orders on the subject including G. O. Ms. No. 193, General Administration Department, dated.14-03-1990 and keeping in view the above judgment of Supreme Court of India, have formulated a scheme for regularization of services of the persons appointed on Daily Wage / NMR or on consolidated pay and are continuing on the date of 6 commencement of the Act. Government accordingly decided that the services of such persons who worked continuously for a minimum period of 5 years and are continuing on 25-11-1993 be regularized by the appointing authorities subject to fulfillment of the following conditions.” 8. Apart from G.O.Ms.No.212, a constitutional bench of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka v. Umadevi1, held that individuals who have been irregularly appointed and working for more than ten (10) years as on that date without intervention should be regularised as a one-time measure. The relevant paragraph 53 is extracted below: “53. One aspect needs to be clarified. There may be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) as explained in S.V. Narayanappa11, R.N. Nanjundappa12 and B.N. Nagarajan8 and referred to in para 15 above, of duly qualified persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts might have been made and the employees have continued to work for ten years or more but without the intervention of orders of the courts or of tribunals. The question of regularisation of the services of such employees may have to be considered on merits in the light of the 1 (2006) 4 SCC 1 7 principles settled by this Court in the cases above referred to and in the light of this judgment. In that context, the Union of India, the State Governments and their instrumentalities should take steps to regularise as a one-time measure, the services of such irregularly appointed, who have worked for ten years or more in duly sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of the courts or of tribunals and should further ensure that regular recruitments are undertaken to fill those vacant sanctioned posts that require to be filled up, in cases where temporary employees or daily wagers are being now employed. The process must be set in motion within six months from this date. We also clarify that regularisation, if any already made, but not sub judice, need not be reopened based on this judgment, but there should be no further bypassing of the constitutional requirement and regularising or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme.” 9. The emphasised part of the above judgment obligates the State Government and its instrumentalities to regularise employees working for over ten (10) years as on that date to be regularised. The inaction on the part of the State Government and its instrumentalities cannot be a ground to deny P.V.Chandra 8 Sekhara Rao from being regularised from the date of his entitlement. 10. It is to be noted that similarly placed persons as late P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao were said to have been regularized as per the orders of this Court in W.P.No.4290 of 2020 as confirmed in W.A.No.483 of 2021, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The Respondents are directed to consider the case of late P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao for regularization with effect from 25.11.1993 i.e., designated date under G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994 on par with the similarly placed employees in W.P.No.4290 of 2020 as confirmed in W.A.No.483 of 2021 passed by Division Bench of this Court. (ii) The Respondents shall pay pension from the date of entitlement of P.V.Chandra Sekhara Rao to the Petitioner. (iii) There shall be no order as to costs. 9 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 09.10.2025 Ivd 10 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.24549 of 2025 Dated: 09.10.2025 Ivd