Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
G.Appala Naidu, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 7 March, 2025
APHC010170612021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3310]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 9462/2021
Between:
G.appala Naidu, ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. P V RAMANA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES IV
The Court made the following Order:
The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
seeking the following relief:
“…..to issue an appropriate Writ more in the nature
of Writ of Mandamus declaring the orders passed by the
nd
2 respondent in Memo No.24265/CS.I/2021, dated 8.4.2021
in rejecting the case of the petitioner for promotion to the
post of DEE as illegal and arbitrary and runs contrary to the
orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court in
W.P.No.17258/2020 dt.14.12.2020 and contrary to the
judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 1996 (1) SCC
524, 1994 (1) SCC 373 and consequentially declare that the
petitioner is entitled for promotion from the date on which
others were promoted w.e.f 3.1.2020 with all consequential
attendant benefits….”
2
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner appointed as
Assistant Executive Engineer in A.P. Public Health and Municipal Engineering
Services as direct recruitee on 26.06.2013. In view of the bifurcation of the
State, keeping in view of the Policy of both the governments for Inter State
Transfers vide Memo dated 07.08.2017 on making application Government of
Telangana issued G.O.Rt.No.157, MA & UD Department, dated 13.03.2018
ordering Inter State Transfer on mutual grounds subject to taking last rank
next to the last regular candidate. Even before that the State of A.P. issued
G.O.Ms.No.73, MA & UD Department, affecting Inter State Transfer of
Mohd.Sirajuddin on mutual basis accommodating the petitioner from
Telangana to Andhra Pradesh. As per Inter State guidelines dated 07.08.2017
and the proceedings under which the petitioner was transferred to the State of
A.P. categorically states that the petitioner should take last rank next to the
last rank candidate. Accordingly, the Engineer-in-Chief on 30.01.2019
prepared Provisional Seniority List of AEEs/AEs (PH) of Zone-I to IV. In
respect of Zone-I, the petitioner was shown at Serial No.3 after last regular
recruitee candidate. The Serial No.1 is the regular candidate of Zone-I with
10.01.2014. Though the petitoner senior as per the date of appointment in
view of the condition fixed in the interstate transfer orders, the petitioner was
shown below No.1 and No.2. While so, on 03.09.2019 Final Seniority List of
AEs and AEEs of Zone-I, II, III and IV was prepared. In respect of Zone-I
though the petitioner’s name is to be shown at Serial No.3, the petitioner’s
3
name was deleted from the list. Hence, the petitioner submitted a
representation dated 16.09.2019 to the 2nd respondent to include his name in
the final seniority list and place before the DPC for Deputy Executive Engineer
(for short “DEE”). The respondents without showing petitioner’s name in
seniority list, affected promotions to K.Sitharam Murthy, and NVSS Narayana
vide orders dated 03.01.2020 from AEEs quota. The petitioner is next person
in the cycle. Now the respondents are taking steps to effect promotions from
DEEs to EEs, thereby the post of DEE will fall vacant. Earlier, the petitioner
filed W.P.No.24265/2020 questioning the action of the respondent in not
showing petitioner’s name in the Final Seniority List dated 03.09.2019 in
Zone-I, after N.V.S.S.Narayana as per the Government circular dated
07.08.2017, keeping in view of the G.O.Rt.No.157, MA & UD Department,
dated 13.03.2018 and G.O.Ms.No.73, MA & UD Department, dated
16.02.2018 as illegal and arbitrary. The respondents filed counter stating that
as per G.O.Ms.No.452, MA & UD Department, dated 20.06.2017, the
petitioner should have minimum 3 years service. Since the petitioner not
having 3 years of service, his case cannot be considered. The question of
providing 3 years minimum service in the same department in respect of the
petitioner, one P.Jayadev who filed W.P.No.17258/2020 before a Division
Bench of this Court with same subject matter. In the said petition, the issue
raised was the length of service is different from minimum service. This Court,
directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner there under for
4
promotion to the post of DEE (PH) without granting seniority by considering
the experience counting from the date of initial appointment for eligibility as
per G.O.Ms.No.452, MA & UD Department, dated 20.06.2017. Thereafter, the
petitioner I.A.No.1/2021 and this Court passed interim orders on 21.01.2021
for considering petitioner’s case keeping in view of the Division Bench
judgement referred above for promotion to the post of DEE. Though the issue
is covered under the above Division Bench judgement, though the length of
service from the date of promotion is to be taken into account as experience
for counting the service, once again the 2nd respondent ignored the orders of
the Division Bench and rejected the case for promotion to DEE vide Memo
No.24265/CS1/2021, dated 08.04.2021 declaring that petitioner is not eligible
for promotion to the post of DEE without having minimum service quoting rule
33 (a) and 35(b). Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been
filed.
3. This Court, vide order, dated 07.05.2021, granted interim
direction by suspending the operation of the order passed by the 2 nd
respondent vide Memo No.24265/CS1/2021, dated 08.04.2021.
4. The 2nd respondent filed counter affidavit denying the allegations
made in the writ petition and stated that the Government vide Circular Memo
No.9940/SPF&MC/2015, dated 07.08.2017, the Governmentt of Andhra
Pradesh & Telangana have issued certain joint guidelines for inter-state
5
transfers in respect of the Zonal cadre employees between the state of
Andhra Pradesh and the state of Telangana and it was clarified therein that,
the transferred employees shall be assigned last rank in the new unit of
appointment and also clarified that, the transferred employees should forgo
seniority in the existing state as well as lien. The petitioner was transferred
from the state of Telangana to the state of Andhra Pradesh at his request and
he is allotted to Zone-I, as per his local status and accordingly, the petitioner
joined in Zone-I on 21.03.2018. It is further stated that the Government vide
Memo No.996193/C1/2019-MA, dated 04.10.2019 has clarified that the
petitioner was joined in the successor state of Andhra Pradesh on inter-state
transfer in the year 2018 from the state of Telangana as per his request and
hence it is very clear that, the petitioner is junior to the Direct Recruitment-
Assistant Executive Engineers, who were appointed and joined in the
Department through APPSC in the year 2017 in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
It is further stated that as per the Deputy Executive Engineer promotional rules
issued by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.452, MA Department, dated
20.06.2007, a person should have complete 3 years of service in the cadre of
Assistant Executive Engineer. Accordingly, the seniority of the petitioner is to
be counted from the date of Joining i.e., from 21.03.2018 FN in the cadre of
Assistant Executive Engineer in the state of Andhra Pradesh on request
transfer as per the joint guidelines issued by the state of Andhra Pradesh and
Telangana vide Government Circular Memo No.9940/SPF&MC/2015, dated
6
07.08.2017. The petitioner has not completed 3 years of service as Assistant
Executive Engineer as on 01-09-2010 (i.e., the date of commencement of the
panel year 2019-2020) in the state of Andhra Pradesh after his joining and
accordingly he is not eligible for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive
Engineer as he has not completed minimum 3 years of physical service in the
cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer in the state of Andhra Pradesh after his
transfer/joining in the new state as on 01.09.2019. Hence, there are no rules
to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of DEE without
having minimum service in the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer after
joining in the state of Andhra Pradesh on inter-state transfer. Therefore, prays
to dismiss the writ petition.
5. Heard Mr.P.V.Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-IV, for the respondents.
6. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the
contents urged in the writ petition, submits that, as per Special Rules issued in
G.O.Ms.No.452, MA & UD Department, dated 20.06.2007 the post of DEE is
to be filled following Roaster between AEs and AEEs and every cycle of 16
vacancies of DEES are to be filled by AEs and AEEs and minimum service of
3 years was prescribed for promotion to DEE. He further submits that the 2nd
respondent without following the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court,
passed the impugned order vide Memo No.24265/CS1/2021, dated
7
08.04.2021 rejecting the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of
DEE as illegal and arbitrary.
7. To support his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner
placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in
Union of India and others vs. C.N.Ponnappan1, wherein the Hon’ble Apex
Court held as follows:
“The service rendered by an employee at the place from where he
was transferred on compassionate grounds is regular service. It is no
different from the service rendered at the place where he is
transferred. Both the periods are taken into account for the purpose of
leave and retrial benefits. The fact that as a result of transfer he is
placed at the bottom of the seniority list at the place of transfer does
not wipe out his service at the place from where he was transferred.
The said service, being regular service in the grade has to be taken
into account as part of his experience for the purpose of eligibility for
promotion and it cannot be ignored only on the ground that it was not
rendered at the place where he has been transferred.”
8. To support his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner
placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in
Union of India vs. V.N.Bhat 2 , wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held as
follows:
“The question which, therefore, arises for consideration is as to
whether the period of service rendered by the respondent in the
Ministry of Defence should be wiped off for all purposes? The well
settled principle of law that even in the case where the transfer has
been allowed on request, the concerned employee merely loses his
seniority but the same by itself would not lead to a conclusion that he
should be deprived of the other benefits including his experience and
eligibility for promotion.”
Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner while relying upon the
above decision, prays to allow the writ petition.
1
1996 SCC (1) 524
2
2003 (8) SCC 714
8
9. Per Contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader while
reiterating the contents made in the counter affidavit and submits that, in the
presentation dated 21.01.2021, the petitioner has reported that, he has
completed 7 years of service in the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer and
eligible for promotion to the post of DEE and requested to consider his case
for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer as per the orders of
this Court dated 14.12.2020 in WP.No.17258/2020 considering his service
from the composite state. He further submits that there are no provisions in
G.O.Ms.No.452, MA Department, dated 20.06.2007 to consider promotions to
the post of Deputy Executive Engineer basing on the experience gained by
the petitioner without inclusion of name in the feeder cadre seniority list
concerned. Hence, the petitioner is not eligible for promotion to the post of
DEE without having minimum service in the cadre of Assistant Executive
Engineer after joining in the state of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner in
WP.No.17258/2020 has also not been considered for promotion as DEE in the
Department as he is also transferred from the State of Telangana to the State
of Andhra Pradesh on request transfer along with the petitioner. He further
submits that in compliance of order of this Court dated 04.03.2021 passed in
W.P.No.24265/2020, speaking orders are issued to the petitioner on
08.04.2021. He further submits that, in view of the orders of this Court dated
14.12.2020 passed in W.P.No.17258/2020, the petitioner will be considered
for the eligibility from the date of his joining in the Department i.e., 03.07.2013
9
in the composite state. For the purpose of seniority, his date of joining in the
new state will be considered as 21.03.2018 and the petitioner will be placed at
appropriate place as per the joint guidelines issued by the state of Andhra
Pradesh and Telangana vide Government Circular Memo
No.No.9940/SPF&MC/2015, dated 07.08.2017 and as per the clarification
Memo issued by the Govt vide Memo No.996193/C1/2019-MA, dated
04.10.2019 and as per rule 35 (b) of Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate
Service Rules.
10. To support his contentions, learned Assistant Government
Pleader placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
reported in Surender Singh Beniwal vs. Hukum Singh and others 3 ,
wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held as follows:
“Since the respondent No.1 applied for a voluntary transfer,
obviously, he has to be placed at the bottom of the seniority list of the
Lecturers already working there.”
11. Perused the record.
12. It is pertinent to mention here that, Rule 33(a) of A.P. State and
Subordinate Service Rules as follows:
“The seniority of a person in a service, class, category or grade
shall, unless he has been reduced to a lower rank as a punishment
be determined by the date of his first appointment to such service,
class, category or grade.”
3
Civil Appeal No.2766 of 2009
10
13. It is pertinent to mention here that, Rule 35(b) of A.P. State and
Subordinate Service Rules as follows:
“The seniority of a member of service, class or category, who is
transferred on his own request from one unit of appointment to
another unit of appointment shall be fixed with reference to the date
of his joining duty in the later unit of appointment.”
14. The Division Bench of this Court has disposed of the writ petition
vide order dated 14.12.2020 in W.P.No.17258 of 2020 with the following
directions:
“…. and directing the respondents to consider the case of the
petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer
[PH], if otherwise entitled to, but not for seniority, by considering the
experience gained from the date of initial appointment, for eligibility,
as per G.O.Ms.No.452 MA & UD Department, dated 20.06.2007.
There shall be no order as to costs.”
15. As seen from the material on record, this Court observed that, the
petitioner has joined in service as Assistant Executive Engineer on 26.06.2013
and in view of bifurcation of the state, the petitioner has requested for Inter
State Transfer and the petitioner was transferred to State of Andhra Pradesh.
Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has been categorically holding that in
request transfer, the employee may lose his seniority but the experience
gained should not be wiped out and he cannot be deprived of his benefit
including his experience and eligibility for promotion.
16. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and on
considering the submissions of both the learned counsels and following the
11
order passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 14.12.2020 in
W.P.No.17258 of 2020, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition,
setting aside the order of the 2nd respondent dated 08.04.2021.
17. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The impugned order
vide Memo No.24265/CS.I/2021, dated 08.04.2021 passed by the 2nd
respondent is hereby set aside. Further the matter is remanded back to the 2nd
respondent to consider the case of the petitioner afresh for promotion to the
post of Deputy Executive Engineer, if otherwise entitled to, but not for
seniority, by considering the experience gained from the date of initial
appointment, for eligibility, as per G.O.Ms.No.452, MA & UD Department,
dated 20.06.2017 and pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law,
within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order. No costs.
18. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
__________________________
Dr. K. MANMADHA RAO, J
Date : 07-03-2025
BMS
[ad_1]
Source link