Civil Appeal No 10539 of 1983
From the Judgment and Order dated 2281983 of the AP Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad in Representation Petition
1899 and 1950 of 1982
A Subba Rao for the Appellant
1013 PP Rao K Ram Kumar Vimal Dave C Markendeya and Gururaja Rao for the Respondents
The following Judgment of the Court was delivered This appeal by special leave is directed against the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal Hydera bad holding that the appellant was appointed to the post of Sub Inspector of
Police Civil as a direct recruit and directing that he shall be accorded seniority from the date when he joined the post on such appointment
On December 30 1968 the appellant who was then an undergraduate was appointed to the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police
During his service in that post he passed the BA Examination of the Osmania University in April 197 1
Pursuant to an advertisement in the local newspaper inviting applications for the posts of SubInspec tor of Police Civil the appellant applied for the post and appeared in the written test and viva voce test
He was selected and appointed to the post on December 14 1976 on probation for two years along with thirtyseven others
After the completion of his probationary period he was confirmed in the post on November 29 1978
It appears that the Inspector General of Police did not accede to the request of the appellant to take into account the period of his service as Reserve Sub Inspector of Police in computing his seniority in the new post of Sub inspector of Police Civil
Thereafter the appellant made a repre sentation to the Government
The Government in its order being GOMS No 344 dated June 11 1982 took the view that the entire period of service of the appellant as Reserve SubInspector of Police should be counted under Rule 15c of the Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules and directed that the appellant would be accorded seniority from the date of his first appointment to the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police that is
from December 30 1968 placing him below Shri Khaja Mohiuddin and above Shri SK Ahmed in the list of Sub Inspectors of Police Civil
It was further directed that this order shall however
not become a precedent for others
 Being aggrieved by the said Government order a number of Sub Inspectors of Police Civil filed three sets of applications to the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal under paragraph 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal order 1975 challenging the validity of the said Government order and praying for setting aside of 1014 the same
The Tribunal by the impugned order struck down the said Government order and directed that the appellant would be accorded seniority from the date when he joined the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil treating him as a direct recruit
Further it was directed that the promotional benefits given to the appellant would be regulated on and from the date he joined the said post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil
Hence this appeal by special leave
The principal question that is involved in this appeal is whether the appellant was appointed to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil as a direct recruit or was recruited in that post by transfer or was simply transferred to that post from the post of Reserve SubInspector of Police following his selection as a direct recruit
In the impugned Government order the Government took the view that the appellant was transferred from the post of Reserve SubInspector of Police to that of Sub Inspector of Police Civil under Rule 15c of the Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules
Rule 15c is as follows Rule 15c
The transfer of a person from one class or category of the service to another class or category carrying the same pay or scale of pay shall not be treated as first appointment to the latter for purposes of seniority and the seniority of a person so transferred shall be determined with reference to the date of his first appointment to the class or category from which he was trans ferred
Where any difficulty or doubt arises in applying this sub rule seniority shall be determined by the appointing authority
 The Tribunal has taken the view that appointment of the appellant to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil was not by way of transfer under Rule 15c nor was it by way of recruitment by transfer
It has been pointed out by the Tribunal and that rightly that Annexure I read with Rule 2a of Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules provides for two modes of appointment which are 1 by promotion and 2 by direct recruitment or recruitment by transfer from any other service
It is not disputed that Sub Inspectors of Police Civil and 1015 Reserve Sub Inspectors of Police both belong to Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service
Recruitment by transfer can only be made from any other service
 As both the posts of Sub Inspectors of Police Civil and Reserve Sub Inspec tors of Police are under the same Service the question of recruitment in the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil by transfer from the post or Reserve Sub Inspector of Police does not arise
Mr Subba Rao learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has not made any attempt to sub stantiate that the appellant s appointment to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil was by way of recruitment by transfer
We are therefore left with the question whether the appellant s appointment was by way of direct recruitment or it was really a case of transfer of the appellant from the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police to that of SubInspector of Police Civil
While it is strenuously urged on behalf 01  the appellant that he was transferred from the post of Reserve SubInspector of Police to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil under Rule 15c of the Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules it is submitted by Mr PP Rao learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents that the appellant was directly recruited to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil
It has been already noticed that the appellant applied for the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil pursuant to an advertisement in the newspapers issued by the Police department inviting applications for appointment to the said post by direct recruitment in the pay scale of Rs 150 300
The minimum academic qualification required for the post was graduation
The vacancies to be filled up were 149 in num ber
The appellant succeeded in the preliminary interview and he was directed to appear at the written test
Thereaf ter he was also called upon to appear at the final inter view before the Selection Board on February 25 1976 and was asked to bring with him original certificates evidence of his date of birth schoolcollege conduct certificate no objection certificate in original if he was a Government Servant etc
In other words the appellant had to undergo the entire procedure prescribed for selection of direct recruits
It has also been noticed earlier that the appel lant was appointed on probation for two years and after the satisfactory completion of his probationary period he was confirmed in the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil
In view of the manner in which the appellant was appointed to the post of SubInspector of Police Civil it is difficult to accept any contention that the appellant was transferred to that post
When a Government servant in transferred from one post to another the question of his selection after a written and a viva voce test does not at all arise
If the 1016 appellant had been transferred simpliciter the appellant would not have been directed to appear at the written test and the interview for the purpose of selection along with other candidates
who also applied for the posts of Sub Inspector of Police Civil pursuant to the said advertise ment in the local newspaper
It is not disputed that the said advertisement was published for filling up the posts of Sub Inspectors of Police Civil by direct recruitment
We are therefore unable to accept the contention made on behalf of the appellant that it was a case of transfer and not of direct recruitment
It is true that the Government has power to transfer under Rule 15c of the Andhra Pradesh Subordinate Police Service Rules
The question however it whether the Government intended to transfer the appellant from the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police to that of Sub Inspector of Police Civil
It has been rightly pointed out that such transfer can be made only in the public interest but there was no question of any public interest so far as the appellant was concerned
Indeed in the impugned Government order it was directed that the same would not be treated as a precedent
If the appellant s appointment to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil was by way of transfer in exercise of the power under Rule 15c there was no necessity for a direc tion that the order would not be treated as a precedent for others
The impugned order was not made by the Government out of its own but on the representation of the appellant which was made after the appellant s request to take into account his period of service at the Reserve Sub Inspector of Police in computing his seniority in the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil was turned down by the Inspector General of Police
In support of the case for transfer the appellant has strongly relied upon two facts namely 1 that he did not submit any resignation from the post of Reserve Sub Inspec tor of Police and 2 that he was allowed to draw last pay as Reserve Sub Inspector of Police even on his appointment as the Sub Inspector of Police Civil
These two facts have also been relied upon by the Government in the impugned order
These two circumstances are no doubt the criteria of a transfer but merely because of the presence of these circumstances it will not justify a finding that the appel lant was transferred as contended by him having regard to the manner in which the appellant was appointed to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil
Although a Government servant can be transferred from one post to another but when he chooses to get himself recruited to that another post after subjecting himself to all requirements and for malities of direct recruit 1017 ment along with other independent candidates and is con firmed after satisfactory completion of the probationary period his appointment as a direct recruit cannot be sub stituted by an order of transfer to the prejudice of the other direct recruits in the matter of computation of sen iority
It may be that the appellant had not resigned from the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police and that the Government allowed him the last pay drawn as Reserve Sub Inspector of Police on his appointment as Sub Inspector of Police Civil that would not in our opinion wipe out the appointment of the appellant as a direct recruit
The Tribu nal in our view is perfectly justified in holding that the appellant was directly recruited to the post of Sub Inspec tor of Police Civil and that his seniority should be computed from the date of such appointment
For the reasons aforesaid the appeal is dismissed
There will however be no order as to costs
We however make it clear that this judgment will not affect the present position of the appellant and the emolu ments which are being paid to him
SL Appeal dismissed


Summary:
On December 30 1968 the appellant then an under graduate was appointed to the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police
During his service in that pest he passed the BA Examination in April 1971 whereafter he applied for the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil pursuant to an advertisement in the newspaper
He was selected and appoint ed to the pest of Sub Inspector on December 14 1976 on probation for two years along with thirty seven others and was confirmed in the post on November 29 1978
The appellant made a representation to the Government that the period of his service as Reserve Sub Inspector of Police should be taken into account in computing his senior ity in the new post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil
The Government by its order dated June 11 1982 took the view that the entire period of service of the appellant as Re serve Sub Inspector of Police should be counted under Rule 15c of the Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules and directed inter alia that the appellant would be accorded seniority from the date of his first appointment to the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police that is from December 30 1968 and further that the order would not become a precedent for others
Aggrieved by the above said Government order a number of Sub Inspectors of Police Civil moved the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal under paragraph 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal Order 1975 challenging the validity of the said Government Order
The Tribunal passed an order striking down the Government order in question and directing i that the appellant would be accorded seniority from the date when he joined the post of the SubInspector of Police Civil treating him as a direct recruit and ii that the promotional benefits given to the appellant would be regulated on 1011 and from the date he joined the said post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil
The appellant appealed to this Court by special leave against the order of the Tribunal above said
Dismissing the appeal the Court HELD The principal question that was involved in the case was whether the appellant was appointed to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil as a direct recruit or was recruited in that post by transfer or was simply transferred to that post from the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police following his selection as a direct recruit
1014B C The Tribunal took the view that the appointment of the appellant to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil was not by way of transfer under Rule 15c nor was it by way of recruitment by transfer it was pointed out by the Tribu nal and rightly that Annexure I read with Rule 2a of the Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules provided for two modes of appointment viz 1 by promotion and 2 by direct recruitment or recruitment by transfer from any other service
1014F H The Sub Inspectors of Police Civil and the Reserve SubInspectors of Police both belonged to the Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service
Recruitment by transfer could only be made from any other service
As both the said posts were under the same service the question of recruit ment in the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil by transfer from the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police did not arise
Therefore the only question left before the Court was whether the appellant s appointment was by way of direct recruitment or it was really a case of transfer from the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police to that of Sub Inspector of Police Civil
1014H 1015A C The appellant had applied for the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil pursuant to an advertisement in the news papers issued by the Police Department inviting applica tions for appointment to the said post by direct recruit ment
The appellant had to undergo the entire procedure like preliminary interview written test final interview production of certificates etc for selection of direct recruits
Also he was appointed on probation and after the satisfactory completion of his probationary period he was confirmed in the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil
In view of the manner in which the appellant was appointed to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil it was diffi cult 1012 to accept any contention that the appellant was transferred to that
When a Government servant is transferred from one post to another the question of his selection after a written test and a viva voce test does not arise
If the appellant had been transferred simpliciter he would not have been directed to appear at the written test and inter view for selection along with other candidates who had applied for the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil pursuant to the advertisement in the newspaper
The Court was therefore unable to accept the contention that the appellant s was a case of transfer and not of direct re cruitment
It was true that the Government had the power to transfer under Rule 15c of the Andhra Pradesh Subordinate Police Service Rules but such a transfer could be made only in public interest and there was no question of any public interest so far as the appellant was concerned
The Govern ment had directed in its order that order would not be treated as a precedent there was no necessity for this direction if the appellant s appointment to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Civil was by way of transfer in exercise of power under Rule 15c
The Government order impugned had not been made by the Government out of its own but on the representation of the appellant
1015D H 1016A B The appellant contended that he did not submit any resignation from the post of Reserve Sub Inspector of Police and that he was allowed to draw last pay as Reserve Sub Inspector even on his appointment as the Sub Inspector of Police Civil but merely because of the presence of these circumstances it would not justify a finding that the appellant had been transferred having regard to the manner in which he came to be appointed to the post of Sub Inspec tor of Police Civil
1016F G The Tribunal was perfectly justified in holding that the appellant was directly recruited to the post of Sub Inspec tor of Police Civil and that his seniority should be computed from the date of such appointment
This judgment however would not affect the present position of the appel lant and the emoluments being paid to him
1017B D