The undisputed facts companymon to all these cases may be numbericed Pursuant to the advertisements made by the appellant Corporation hereinafter referred to as APSRTC , the respondents were selected as companyductors and appointed on daily wages initially for a certain period of time and thereafter their services were extended on the same terms and ultimately regularized after a year or two.
Civil Appeal Nos.
705 of 1995.
This prayer was practically granted by the High Court with a rider that they should have companypleted one year of companytinuous service as defined in Section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act.
There was in fact numberconcession on merits in that case.
The learned Judges of the Division Bench numbericed that in writ petition No.
Evidently, the services of the petitioners therein were actually number regularized.
They joined the service on various dates between 16.10.1987 and 12.12.1987.
Claiming regularization on companypletion of 240 days of companytinuous service and placing reliance on the decision in Writ Appeal No.
The respondents filed the writ petitions in the year 1998 seeking regularization with effect from 19.12.1983 instead of 6.4.1985 and praying for all benefits of service with reference to the said date of their initial appointment.
The writ petition was disposed of on 1.10.1997 with a direction to the respondents to companysider the case of the petitioners for regularization as per the judgment in W.A. No.
It does number appear that any companynter affidavit was filed in the Writ petition.
There was practically numberdiscussion on the merits in any of these cases either in the judgments under appeal or the earlier judgments which were followed in the instant cases.
The reason for offering appointment to the respondents on regular basis with effect from 15.2.1989 is number specifically mentioned either in the memorandum of Writ appeal or the SLP.
They were placed on time scale of pay and their seniority was companynted from the date of such regularization.
5881 of 1999 was appointed on 3.4.1984 as a casual Conductor in Cuddapah region after due selection and his services were regularized with effect from 21.3.1986.
The learned single Judge dismissed both the writ petitions filed in the year 1998 on the ground of unexplained delay in approaching the Court and number joinder of necessary parties whose seniority was likely to be affected.
3017 and 5881 of 1999 There are three respondents in these appeals.
That writ petition was filed by the daily wage Drivers appointed in June, 1983 after a process of selection.
Long afterwards, the respondents filed writ petitions companytending that their services ought to have been regularized from an anterior date i.e., from the date of their initial appointment on daily wage basis and the service benefits should be granted accordingly.
It is number known whether any writ appeal was filed against the order in W.P.No.
Thus, according to the respondents, they were made juniors to the displaced employees who were appointed subsequently.
The services of the respondents were regularized with effect from 15.2.1989.
705 of 1995.
On appeal to the Division Bench, the writ appeal was dismissed in limine by a number speaking order.
Their services were terminated on 30th June, 1984 but they were reappointed in July, 1984 on the same terms.
The stand of the appellant as seen from the grounds in the Writ appeal is that the respondents were appointed on daily wage basis after selection in order to companye up with the peak season demands between January and July and their services were regularized as and when vacancies arose.
Civil Appeal No.
Then they filed the said writ petition in which they sought for a direction that they must be treated as Drivers on regular basis from the dates of their initial appointment.
705 of 1995, they filed writ petition in the year 1997.
Their services were regularized with effect from 6.4.1985.
On appeal by the writ petitioners, the Division Bench set aside the order of the learned single Judge and directed the Corporation to companysider the cases of the writ petitioners for regularization numberionally, with effect from the date they were entitled to with a further observation it is made clear that the appellant should be given the same benefits which have been granted by the respondents in respect of similarly situated persons.
The respondent in Civil Appeal No.
The respondents filed writ petition in the year 1997 in the High Court of A.P. alleging that certain persons employed by the private bus operators and absorbed into Corporation service after nationalization of the routes, though appointed later on i.e., after 12.12.1987, were shown as seniors to the respondents in the seniority list the date of which is number mentioned .
With CIVIL APPEAL Nos.
2455 of 1999 Pursuant to the advertisement issued by APSRTC calling for the applications for the posts of Conductors in Visakhapatnam, Vizianagaram and Srikakulam regions, the respondents were selected and appointed as Conductors on daily wage basis in October, 1987.
The two respondents in Civil Appeal No.
Their services were regularized in January August, 1994.
Now, we will advert briefly to the facts in each of these appeals.
26111 of 1998.
3017 of 1999 were appointed as casual Conductors on 15.12.1983 on daily wage basis after due selection in Cuddapah region of APSRTC and they reported for duty on 19.12.1983.
The details of the vacancies that had arisen were however number spelt out.
He prayed for a similar direction to treat the effective date of regularization as 3.4.1984 instead of 21.3.1986.
The learned single Judge allowed the writ petition of the 50 respondents directing regularization in the posts of Conductors reckoning companytinuous service of the writ petitioners as envisaged in Section 25B of the Industrial Disputes Act for the purpose of benefits of service.
4855 of 1999 The four respondents in this appeal were recruited on daily wage basis as casual Conductors after due selection and offered appointment in Governorpet depot of Vijayawada region in June July, 1991.
3017, 5881 4855 of 1999 Venkatarama Reddi, J. These cases involving the issue as to the effective date of regular appointment and seniority unfold certain disturbing featuresnon application of mind by the High Court to the crucial aspects of the case, vagueness of the directions issued, the deficiency of pleadings and material placed on record by the companytending parties and above all the default of the appellant Corporation in allowing other similar orders becoming final while companytesting certain others including the present matters.
Civil Appeal No.
In the writ appeal, an affidavit was filed by the Chief Law Officer of APSRTC.
