1 APHC010451912023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA WRIT APPEAL NO: 923 OF 2023 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent to allow the writ appeal by setting aside the order dated 21-12-2022 in W.P (A.T).No. 566 of 2021 and pass Between: 1. THE STATE OF AP, Represented by its Principle secretary, Iand CAD (Water Resources) Department, AP Secretariat, Amaravathi, Guntur District 522001. 2. Engineer-in-Chief (Admin Wing),, Iand CAD (Water Resources) Department, Irrigation department office near CM Camp Office, Near PWD Ground, Vijayawada Krishna District 520001 3. The Superintending Engineer,, NSJC Oand M Circle, Lingamguntla, Narasaraopet - 522601, Guntur District Sate of A.P ...Petitioners AND 2 1. SK HUSSAIN BEE, W/o Sk. Ismail. Aged 58 years, working as Sweeper NSJC Oand M and SIFT Division, Vinukonda R/o.N.S.P Colony, Narasaraopet Guntur District- 522601 State of Andhra Pradesh. 2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, Represented by its Principle Secretary, Finance Department, AP Secretariat, Amaravathi, Guntur District 522001. ...Respondents WRIT PETITION NO: 32118 OF 2018 Between: 1. N.Ramudu,, S/o Malleshappa, aged 55 years, Occ: Record Assistant Telugu Ganga Project, Nandyal Division Kurnool District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The Superintending Engineer, Telugu Ganga Project Circle, Nandyala, Kurnool District. 2. The EngineerinChief, State of A.P. Irrigation Department, (now Water Resources Department) Vijayawada, Krishna District. 3. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department (now Water Resources Department) Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 4. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning Department Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be 3 pleased toto issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with the orders made in 0.A.No.3564/2014, dated 14-08-2018 on the file of the Honble A.P.Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and to quash or set aside the same by holding as erroneously and contrary to law and consequentially this Honble Court may be pleased to declare that the petitioner is entitled for regularisation notionally from 25-11-1993 for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner : Pilla N.V.L.Narayana Aditya Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR SERVICES III The Court made the following order: 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA WRIT APPEAL NO.923 OF 2023 AND WRIT PETITION NO: 32118 OF 2018 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.Ramesh ) The Writ Appeal, vide W.A. No.923 of 2023, is preferred by the State aggrieved by the orders dated 21.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (AT) No. 566 of 2021. 2. The Writ Petition No.32118 of 2018 is filed with the following prayer:- “..to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with the orders made in on the file of the Hon'ble Ο.Α.Νο.3564/2014, dated 14-08-2018 A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and to quash or set aside the same by holding as erroneously and contrary to law and consequentially this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to declare that the petitioner is entitled for regularization notionally from 25-11-1993 for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 3. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the judgments relied upon, the learned Single Judge allowed W.P.(AT) No.566 of 2021 by passing the following order dated 21.12.2022: 5 “10. Following the order of the Hon’ble Bench of this Court as cited supra, the Writ Petition is allowed, while declaring the proceedings issued by the 1st and 3rd respondents as illegal, arbitrary and same is hereby set aside. Further, the respondents are directed to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date of completing continuous period of 5 years’ service from 06.03.1979.” 4. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the appellant/ State has mainly contended that initially the case of the writ petitioner/1st respondent was considered in terms of G.O. (P) No.112 dated 23.07.1997,and her services were regularised vide G.O.Ms.No.25 I & CAD Department, dated 15.02.2013. While considering the case of the petitioner for regularization, the authorities taking the vacancy position into consideration, regularized the services from the date of vacancies, i.e., 15.02.2013. However, in the instant case, learned Single Judge has not considered the said aspect and allowed the Writ Petition. 5. In fact, an identical issue has been considered by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in W.P.No.33936 of 2011 and Batch, wherein the following observations were made: “On the above analysis, the writ petitions are disposed of directing the authorities concerned to extend the benefit of B.SRINIVASULU1 to the employees in this batch of cases by reckoning their services from the date 1 Civil Appeal No.6318 of 2015 decided on 17.08.2015 6 of completion of five years in service, on or before 25.11.1993, for the purposes of their pension and pensionary benefits. They shall however not be entitled to actual monetary benefits for the said period, in the form of arrears of pay or allowance.” 6. But in the instant case, the learned Single Judge has straight away allowed the Writ Petition without recording any finding with regard to the availability of regular vacancies and eligibility of the petitioner for retrospective regularization. 7. In reply to the above contentions, learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent herein [writ petitioner in W.P.(AT) No.566 of 2021] contended that the petitioner is eligible for regularization in terms of G.O.(P) No. 112, dated 23.07.1997, as she has completed minimum period of eligibility of (10) years as on the cut-off date fixed in the said G.O. is 25.11.1993. Hence, she is entitled for regularization of her services from the said cut-off date. Learned counsel further contended that, having regard to her eligibility and entitlement to retirement benefits, the learned Single Judge rightly considered the matter and allowed the writ petition. 8. Considering the submissions and on perusal of the Orders passed by the learned Single Judge, no doubt an identical issue was considered by the Division Bench, in the batch of Writ Petitions referred above, and the said decision was subsequently affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court. However, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Division Bench had extended such benefit to the 7 employees for reckoning their services from the date of completion of five years of service in terms of the said G.O., for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits. But in the instant case, the writ petition was allowed directing the respondents to regularize services of the writ petitioner irrespective of the availability of vacancies, with effect from the date of completion of the period prescribed under the aforesaid G.O. Hence, the impugned orders are set aside, with a direction to the authorities to extend the same benefit, to the petitioners by reckoning their services, from the date of completion of 10 years i.e. the date fixed in the G.O. as on 25.11.1993, for the purpose of their pension and pensionary benefits. It is made clear that they are not entitled to the actual monetary benefits for the said period. 9. Accordingly the Writ Appeal is allowed. 10. Insofar as W.P.No.32118 of 2018 is concerned, since the issue involved therein is identical to the issue considered in the present Writ Appeal and the relief sought therein is also with regard to notional regularisation of the services of the petitioner with effect from 25.11.1993 for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits, the reasoning and conclusions recorded hereinabove shall equally apply to the said writ petition. 11. Accordingly, W.P.No.32118 of 2018 is also disposed of in terms of the directions issued hereinabove. The petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit of notional regularisation for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits, 8 subject to the conditions stated above, but shall not be entitled to any actual monetary benefits for the said period in the form of arrears of pay or allowances. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH ___________________________________ JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA Date: 15.09.2026 Pnr 9 203 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA WRIT APPEAL NO.923 OF 2023 AND WRIT PETITION NO: 32118 OF 2018 [COMMON JUDGMENT ] 15.09.2026 Pnr