Jami Ajay Kumar S/O Govindha Rao v. The District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, .Rep. By Its

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI W.P.No.42949 OF 2017

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner as Typist (English & Telugu) pursuant to Resolution No.33, dated 30.06.2014 issued by the 2nd respondent. Heard Sri S.R.Sanku, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D.Balakishan Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.

It is the case of the petitioner that he was initially appointed as Typist in the 1st respondent-Bank during 2007; that the 1st respondent took a decision and passed Resolution No.33, dated 30.06.2014 regularizing the services of the petitioner along with one MSV Prasad Rao; that the said Resolution was not implemented; that the said MSV Prasad Rao made a representation and also filed W.P.No.26851 of 2017; that this Court vide order dated 10.08.2017 in WPMP No.33343 of 2017 in W.P.No.26851 of 2017 directed the 1st respondent therein to dispose of the representation dated 19.7.2017 submitted by the petitioner therein in accordance with law.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since the 1st respondent had passed Resolution to

regularize the services of the petitioner, a similar direction be given to the 1st respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner herein on 29.11.2017 since this Court had granted interim direction in respect of similarly situated person viz., MSV Prasad Rao.

This Court is also of the view that a similar direction can be granted in this case also.

Therefore, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the representation dated 29.11.2017 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Since this Court is not expressed any opinion as to the eligibility of the petitioner, it is left open to the 1st respondent to decide as to whether the petitioner is entitled for regularization of his services or not. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI 2nd January, 2018 rkk