1 APHC010168492026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] MONDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 8726/2026 Between: 1. KOLA RAMESH, S/O.K.KODHA NDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.13-3-344 11/B, JABBAR LAYOT, TIRUPATI (URBAN), TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 517 501. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF ENDOWMENTS, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE, AMARAVATHI.522237 2. TIRUMAH TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAM, REP. BY ZITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER,TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 517501 3. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAM, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT.517501 4. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAM, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI 2 DISTRICT.517501 5. CHIEF MUSEUM OFFICER, SRI VENKATESHWARA MUSEUM, TIRUMALA.517501 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VMR LEGAL Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES II 2. V.DYUMANI (SC for TTD) The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.8726 of 2026 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. V. Dyumani, learned Standing Counsel for Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam (TTD) appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 5. 2. The petitioner is working as an Office Subordinate at the S.V. Museum, Tirumala. The instant writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents for payment of the minimum time scale attached to the respective posts and for regularization of his services. 3. The contention of the petitioner is that he was appointed against sanctioned post after following a due selection process. It is further contended that the TTD, after selecting the candidates and subjecting them to regular training, handed them over to an outsourcing agency in order to escape the liability of paying the time scale attached to the posts and to continue them in the capacity of contractual employees. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance on judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Nihal Singh and Others 4 Vs. State of Punjab and Others1 and the decision of this Court in W.P.Nos.4964 of 1989 and 5476 of 1989 contends that the petitioner is entitled for regularization of his services. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in similar facts and circumstances, this Court has already granted relief in W.P.No.4035 of 2026 by order dated 11.02.2026 and therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the same relief. 5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 to 5 also does not dispute this fact. 6. Considering the submissions and in view of the orders dated 11.02.2026 passed by this Court in W.P.No.4035 of 2026, placing reliance on the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Jaggo Vs. Union of India & Others2, and Dharam Singh & Others Vs. State of U.P & another3 and further placing reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P. Nos.29403 and 38488 of 2018 dated 03.04.2018, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file a separate representation seeking regularization of his services/Minimum Time Scale, before the 3rd respondent – Board, 1 (2013) 14 SCC 65 2 2024 INSC 1034 3 2025 INSC 998 5 mentioning the date of appointment and furnishing details regarding the duties discharged by him, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such representation, the 3rd respondent – Board, after calling for necessary reports, if any, from the Executive Officer of TTD, shall pass appropriate orders within a period of six (6) months thereafter. 7. Till final orders are passed on the representation to be filed by the petitioner, the 2nd respondent shall continue the services of the petitioner, if he is presently continuing, and shall continue to pay the minimum time scale as directed by this Court in earlier interim orders. During the pendency of consideration of the representation, the respondents shall not take any coercive steps to discontinue the services of the petitioner. 8. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date: 20.04.2026 Ivd 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.8726 of 2026 Dated: 20.04.2026 Ivd