* THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY +WRIT PETITION No. 6203 of 2011 % Dated 16.08.2011 # Mynam Yesuraju and another … Petitioners versus $ The Commissioner and Director of Sugar and Cane Commissioner and 4 & others … Respondents. ! Counsel for Petitioner : Mr.V.V.N. Narayana Rao ^Counsel for Respondents: Learned G.P. for Industries for R1 Sri. S.R. Ashok, Counsel for R2 & R3 Sri. C. Aditya, Counsel for R5 <GIST: >HEAD NOTE: ? Cases referred: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6203 of 2011 ORDER: The 3rd respondent is the Co-operative Sugar Factory at Etikoppaka, Visakhapatnam District. It is fully controlled by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. There exists a post of Chief Chemist in the common cadre of the 3rd respondent. The 1st respondent is the appointing authority for that post as per the Rules framed under Section 116-A of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Act. The 4th respondent was holding that post and he attained the age of superannuation on 30-09-2008. On a representation made by the 3rd respondent, the 1st respondent permitted it to continue the 4th respondent on contract basis. That arrangement is being carried out from year to year and as of now, the 4th respondent is continuing in the post of Chief Chemist with effect from 11- 10-2010. When he retired from service, his pay was Rs.26,486/- and it is stated that subsequently revisions have taken place. At present, his emoluments are enhanced to Rs.40,000/- per month. The petitioners are the shareholders and members of the 3rd respondent-Sugar Factory. They raise objection for continuance of the 4th respondent in the said post. According to them, it is not at all in the interest of the Society, to continue persons in such important posts beyond the date of superannuation, that too by enhancing the emoluments. It is also stated that they have raised the issue in General Body meeting, but on account of the influence of certain groups, the 4th respondent is being continued. The 5th respondent is the Trade Unions Joint Action Committee of the workers in the 3rd respondent Factory. They too raise objection for continuance of the 4th respondent in that post. According to them, there are several eligible candidates for being considered for the post of Chief Chemist and on account of their non-consideration, a semblance of stagnation and disinterestedness is developing among the employees. Heard Sri V.V.N.Narayana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Government Pleader for the 1st respondent, S.R.Ashok, learned senior counsel for the 2nd and 3rd respondents, and Sri C. Aditya, learned counsel for the 5th respondent. Though R-4 is served with notice, he has not chosen to enter appearance. It is not in dispute that the 4th respondent attained the age of superannuation on 30-09-2008 and retired from the post of Chief Chemist. The 1st respondent was required to take necessary steps immediately, if not well in advance, to fill the vacancy. An important post of that nature ought not to have been dealt with, in such a manner. Maybe, on being impressed by the performance of the 4th respondent, the 3rd respondent addressed letters to the 1st respondent seeking permission to continue him on contract basis. Such a permission, if at all, ought to have been accorded for a brief spell, so that a perfect change over in the incumbency takes place. The reasons stated by the 1st respondent in not taking steps for filling the post are totally untenable. One of the contentions urged by the 1st respondent is that as against 11 sugar factories in the State, only four Chief Chemists are working. In a way, this reflects the inefficiency of the 1st respondent in filing the posts at the right time. It is on account of the callous attitude exhibited by the government that quite a large number of cooperative sugar factories in the state have sustained losses and showing that as an excuse, considerable number of them are sold at throwaway prices, sacrificing the larger public interest. It is rather unfortunate that the 1st respondent has chosen to plead his own inefficiency, as a justification for the illegality committed by him. In every organisation, particularly where different stages exist, the persons in the lower cadre expect promotions as and when the incumbents in the higher cadres retire. In a way, the persons expecting entry into higher posts would feel elated in case they are appointed or promoted, as the case may be, to the higher post and would work with zeal. If the higher posts are either kept vacant for a longer period or if the retired employees are permitted to continue in them, several negative developments would take place. Firstly, the retired employee, maybe with a few rare exceptions, would feel that he is indispensable for the organisation and would develop a vested interest. Secondly, the persons, who are otherwise entitled to be promoted or appointed, would get discouraged, if not driven to frustration. It is rather unfortunate that of late, in the Government and its organisations, important positions are being permitted to be handled by retired persons either on ad hoc or on contract basis, resulting in the consequences mentioned above. Such persons hardly have any conviction or commitment for the development of the organisation, and taking advantage of their position, they act mostly to advance their personal interest. Had the 1st respondent been sincere to ensure that the factory runs well, he would have appointed a person in accordance with the Rules and at the most asked the 4th respondent to impart training to the new incumbent, if necessary. Instead, the 4th respondent is being continued for the past three years as though he is indispensable for the Factory and that except him, no other person is capable. It is such misplaced sympathies or undue favouritism that would spoil the organization over the period, though some persons may get immediate benefit or satisfaction. This Court takes a serious view of the inaction on the part of the 1st respondent in appointing an incumbent in the post of Chief Chemist in the 3rd respondent factory. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the orders issued from time to time by the 1st respondent enabling the 3rd respondent to continue the 4th respondent as Chief Chemist are set aside. The 1st respondent shall take necessary steps to appoint a Chief Chemist for the 3rd respondent Factory within one month from today. The 4th respondent shall not be continued beyond that period. If necessity arises for any arrangement, it shall be open to the parties to approach this Court by filing an application. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 16-08-2011 Note: Issue C.C. in one week (B/o) Prv LR copy to be marked.