Mr. Vudugula Venkatesh vs The State Of Telangana on 19 August, 2025

0
4

The case of petitioners is that they joined the

service of Respondent No.3 company through Respondent No. 4

provider of contract labourers, between 2008 and 2014. At the

time of their appointment, Respondent No. 4 assured that they

would soon be transferred to the rolls of Respondent No. 3 as

casual and permanent employees, however, despite several

Long-Term Settlements dated 17.08.2006, 20.04.2009,

16.10.2012, 05.10.2018 and 27.04.2022, whereunder other

contract workers were regularized as permanent employees of

Respondent No. 3, petitioners were not given the opportunity to

be considered or transferred. They state that they were in

continuous employment and did not receive proper notice or

explanation for this denial.

[ad_1]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here