The High Court For The State Of Telangana vs. Ganta Sudhakar Rao

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS. /2025 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.17642-17643/2023]

THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

GANTA SUDHAKAR RAO & ORS. ETC. Respondent(s)

O R D E R

Leave granted.

2. Heard Mr. K.M. Nataraj, the learned Additional Solicitor General for the appellants. The respondents/writ petitioners are represented by Mr. Dama Seshadri Naidu, learned Senior Counsel. Mr. Vineet George, learned counsel, appears for the State of Telangana.

3. Notice in this case was issued on 25.08.2023 with the following order:-

" …

The counsel would submit that the direction of the Division Bench of the High Court declaring that the respondents are entitled to regularization is unmerited as they were contractual employees. Secondly, the High Court erred in observing that the respondents were appointed against posts sanctioned in the Temporary Special Magistrate's Court established initially for a period of 5 years and extended from time to time. The counsel would refer to the counter affidavit filed in the High Court to say that a specific plea was taken that the respondents are not working against regular sanctioned posts and therefore their services cannot be regularized.

2. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the contractual employees would submit that they were inducted through a regular process of written test and viva-voce and the State has created posts for their accommodation. And if the State is not averse to accommodating these long serving contractual appointees, why should the High Court come and challenge the reasonable direction of the Division Bench of the High Court.

3. Issue notice, returnable in six weeks."

4. To assail the judgment of the High Court declaring that the writ petitioners therein were entitled to regularization of service in existing vacancies, the learned ASG refers to the counter affidavit filed by the State of Telangana to point out that the State is concerned about the financial implication and the burden on the Exchequer on regularization of the respondents.

5. The above submission of the appellants' counsel has to be understood in the context of the fact that the impugned judgment of the High Court was rendered as far back as on 12.06.2023 and the State has not filed their independent appeal to challenge the said judgment. In these circumstances, to rest the High Court's challenge on the State's shoulder, does not find favour with this Court.

6. We have considered the submission of the learned counsel for the parties together with the reasoning given by the division Bench of the High Court in allowing the writ petition through the impugned order dated 12.06.2023. In our considered opinion, the same does not require any interference by this Court. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand closed.

................. J. [HRISHIKESH ROY ]

................. J. [ S.V.N. BHATTI ]

NEW DELHI; JANUARY 29, 2025

ITEM NO.4 COURT NO.4 SECTION XII-A

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).17642-17643/2023

[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-06-2023 in WP No.24506/2019 12-06-2023 in WP No. 8096/2021 passed by the High Court for The State of Telangana at Hyderabad]

THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

GANTA SUDHAKAR RAO & ORS. ETC. Respondent(s)

IA No. 170214/2023 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION IA No. 159243/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 159242/2023 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES

Date : 29-01-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI

For Petitioner(s) :

Mr. K.M. Nataraj, A.S.G. Mr. Somanadri Goud Katam, AOR Ms. Neha Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Sharath Nambiar, Adv. Mr. Sirajuddin, Adv.

For Respondent(s) :

Mr. Dama Seshadri Naidu, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sumanth Nookala, AOR

Mr. Vineet George, Adv. (appearance slip not given) Mr. Chand Qureshi, AOR Mr. Rajat Baijal, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. Mr. Chandan Kumar Mandal, Adv. Mr. Dhirendra Kumar Verma, Adv. Mr. Raj Kumar Yadav, Adv. Mr. Harshit Shishodia, Adv. Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Adv.

Ms. Devina Sehgal, AOR Mr. S. Uday Bhanu, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.

The appeals are dismissed in terms of the signed order.

Pending application(s), if any, stand closed.

[DEEPAK JOSHI] [KAMLESH RAWAT] ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Signed Order is placed on the File)