Nunavath Devender And 10 Others v. The Chief Managing Director And 5 Others

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.19916 OF 2019 Date: 26.09.2019 Between:

Nunavath Devender S/o.Kishan Aged 35 yrs, Occu : Un-employee, R/o.Rangapuram Village, Paloncha Mandal, Bhadradri Kothagudem District & others.

.....Petitioners And The Chief Managing Director, Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Ltd., (TSGENCO), Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad & others .....Respondents The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.19916 OF 2019 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms.A.Deepthi, learned Standing counsel for respondents 1 to 3, learned Government Pleader for respondents 4 and 6 and learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare for respondent No.5. 2.

Petitioners claim to be the residents of Rangapuram Village. From the representation dated 12.09.2018 and from the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of Writ Petition, it appears that petitioners contend that certain persons whose names are mentioned in the representation were taken on outsourcing basis for the purpose of construction of KTPS Stage 5 & 6. They allege that no proper procedure was followed in identifying the persons who can be appointed in the said manner and by illegal means, petitioners were deprived of such appointment and the same is arbitrary and unconstitutional.

3.

The appointments which petitioners are now opposing were made in the year 2011-12 when construction activity was going on. For the reasons best known, petitioners kept quiet all along, though they claim to be the residents of same village. In paragraph No.4 of the affidavit filed in support of writ petition, petitioners allege that Village Level Committee is required to conduct public meetings. But in the instant case, without notice, the Local Village Committee prepared the list and sent it to the Department. In other words, the grievance of the petitioners appears to be that the Village Level Committee did not follow the procedure and without giving notice to petitioners, some list was prepared ignoring the

names of petitioners. If that is so, petitioners ought to have agitated immediately thereafter and contested the matter. 4.

According to learned Standing counsel, contract employment was provided to the local tribals in the construction work of KTPS Stage V & VI and now the entire construction activity is completed and the respondent-Company no more requires outsourcing employment for construction.

5.

Having regard to the above submission and the fact that the persons who were stated to have been appointed in the year 2011-12 are not parties to the writ petition and petitioners kept quiet for more than six years in agitating the grievance, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition. 6.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

Pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

___________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J 26th September, 2019 Rds