(per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)
Heard Sri K. Ramalingeswara Rao, learned Government Pleader for
Services-II, for the petitioners and Sri P. Veerabhadra Reddy, learned counsel
for the respondents.
2. Respondents No.1 to 5 are the applicants in O.A.No.2069 of 2011
before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (in short ‘the
Tribunal’). They would be referred to as the ‘applicants’. The petitioners herein
were the respondents No.1 to 4 in the O.A. and would be referred to as the
‘petitioners’.
3. The applicants had applied for the posts of School Assistant under
DSC-2001. They were initially appointed to the post of School Assistant as per
their merit in the selections. Some of the selected candidates were appointed
in January, 2002. Subsequently, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.76,
Education Department, dated 23.09.2002, directing the District Educational
Officers (DEOs) to recast the selection list of DSC-2001 as per the judgment of
the Tribunal in O.A.No.562 of 2002 and batch dated 22.07.2002. The DEOs
had recasted the selection list, called the applicants for counseling in October,
2002 and issued posting Orders in October, 2002 and they joined as School
Assistants in the same month, and since then, they had been working in those
posts. The applicants could not be appointed along with those selectees who
RNT, J & CGR, J
were appointed and joined in January, 2002 due to mis-interpretation of the
provisions of the Presidential Order and finally, pursuant to the Order of the
Tribunal in O.A.No.562 of 2002 they were given appointments in October, 2002.
The applicants, thus, due to some irregularity in selection, could not be
appointed in January, 2002 along with their batch-mates. They made
representations to fix up their seniority on par with those who were appointed
in January, 2002 as per their merit and ranking in the selection list, but no
action was taken and at no point of time, seniority list of Teachers selected in
DSC-2001 was communicated to the applicants. Later on, for effecting
promotions to the next cadre, the petitioners were taking the date of joining of
the applicants in October, 2002 as criteria for fixing up the seniority ignoring
their merit and ranking in the selection list of DSC-2001. The applicants filed
O.A.No.2069 of 2011. The Tribunal initially passed interim Order, directing the
petitioners to dispose of the applicants’ representation and also to prepare
seniority list in accordance with Rule 33 (b) of the Andhra Pradesh State and
Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 (in short ‘the Rules 1996′). The petitioners
rejected the request of the applicants vide proceedings in Rc.No.164-B5/2011,
dated 14.03.2012 based on the instructions of the 3rd petitioner in
Rc.No.3741/D1-4/2011, dated 28.12.2011 and by the same proceedings they
also communicated the seniority list in Rc.No.164-B5/2011, dated 14.03.2012.
The applicants’ seniority was fixed as per the date of their joining in October,
2002. The applicants amended the O.A. and also questioned the said seniority
list and the Order of rejection.