Hearing on PIL against APNGOs resumes today

Hyderabad: “The APNGOs service rules that prevent strikes is directory and not mandatory,” senior counsel CV Mohan Reddy told the State High Court on Wednesday. He argued that the expression ‘shall not strike’ is to be read as ‘may not strike’. In the absence of a mandatory duty of the State to proceed and strike against such agitating employees, the present writ, he said, is not maintainable. Reacting to the usage of the expression politics and political agitation, Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta pointed out to the absence of its usage in the Constitution.

The counsel pointed out that in any event the petitioner had failed to plead or establish how the public were affected and how the government has come to a standstill, as alleged. Relying upon the stated pleadings of the government Mohan Reddy said that even according to the government it was taking steps.

He said the steps taken may not be to the satisfaction of the court but that in itself would not empower the court to issue a mandamus as prayed for. He cautioned against the invocation of ESMA and said that it could be counterproductive. It is not easy for the government to strike the whip on a large workforce. It would be difficult, he said, to replace them on termination surely to find experienced replacements. The bench of the Chief Justice and Justice KC Bhanu will resume hearing the matter on Thursday.