THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.15260 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in not processing the Salary Bills of the staff of KVR, KVR & MKR College, Kajipalem, Guntur District, stating that the same is not signed by the Principal but signed by the Principal In-charge, who is the second petitioner, and also is in contravention of G.O.Ms.No.127, dated 07.06.1993, which is not in application to the present case, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The averments in the Writ Petition, in brief, may be stated as follows: The petitioner institution was established long back and it is now functioning with staff of nearly 40 members. The second petitioner was originally appointed in the college as Physical Director on 07.12.1981 and the said post was re-designated as Lecturer in Physical Education. Later, the second petitioner was appointed as Principal In – Charge of the petitioner institution with effect from 01.12.2010. As there is a vacancy for the post of Principal in the petitioner institution on account of the retirement of the incumbent and the second petitioner being senior most among the Lecturers in the College, he was appointed as Principal In-charge. After the second petitioner was appointed as Principal In-charge, he has been acting so, with effect from 01.12.2010. The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Education (J) Department, in Letter No.3490/J2/76-2, Edn., dated 29.11.1976, informed that the Physical Directors are considered as members of the teaching staff. As per G.O.Ms.No.91, Edn., dated 26.03.1987, the Physical Directors in Degree Colleges are re-designated as Lecturers in Physical Education. The qualifications for Lecturers in Physical Education and subject Lecturers in Degree and Oriental Colleges are teaching staff having same qualifications; and their procedure of appointment and scale of pay are also same, and the Lecturers in Physical Education are also to be considered for the post of Principal in Degree and Oriental Colleges. As such the Management appointed the second petitioner as the Principal In-charge of the first petitioner institution. Basing upon the proposal sent by the second petitioner as Principal In-charge, the third respondent released the Salary Bills of the staff of the petitioner institution up to April, 2011. While so, the Salary Bill sent for the month of May, 2011, was not processed by the third respondent on the ground that the same was signed by the second petitioner as Physical Director. The ground raised by the second respondent that the proposal signed by the second petitioner is in contravention of G.O.Ms.No.127, Education (CE-I) Department, dated 07.06.1993, is erroneous and without any valid basis. The third respondent acted upon the previous proposals signed by the second petitioner as Principal In-charge. There is no justification whatsoever in the endorsement made by the third respondent stating that the said proposal was not signed by the Principal and it is in contravention of G.O.Ms.No.127. The second petitioner was appointed as Principal In-charge and the same was not challenged by anybody and the same has become final. The Management appointed the second petitioner as Principal In-charge as he is the senior most Lecturer and only senior Lecturer (teacher) has to be appointed as Principal In-charge. There is no justification whatsoever on the part of the third respondent in refusing to process the Salary Bill for payment of salaries to the staff signed by the second petitioner as Principal In-charge. The second petitioner is fully qualified and eligible to be considered for the post of Principal as per the Rules in vogue. The second petitioner being the senior most Lecturer, he was considered to be appointed as Principal In-charge since 01.12.2010. On account of the illegal action of the third respondent the staff of the college are deprived of the salary for the month of May, 2011, for no fault of them. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the second petitioner was appointed as Principal, Full Additional Charge, with effect from 01.12.2010 as the previous Principal, Dr. K. Rama Raju, retired on attaining the age of superannuation; that thereafter, the Salary Bills of the staff and employees of the petitioner institution are being processed by the Correspondent and as well as the Principal In-charge, second petitioner; that the same were being honoured by the Regional Joint Director till April, 2011; and that for the month of May, 2011, the Regional Joint Director dishonoured the Salary Bills of the staff of the petitioner institution on the ground that the Salary Bills are not being signed by the Principal. 4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents contended that since the second petitioner is not a senior most teaching Lecturer of the petitioner institution, he cannot be kept in Full Additional Charge of the Principal post; that the senior most Lecturer in teaching can alone be appointed as having Full Additional Charge for the post of Principal and so, the Regional Joint Director, has rightly not processed the Salary Bills and hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the same. 5. It is not in dispute before this Court that till April, 2011, Salary Bills of the staff of the first petitioner institution have been processed and the salaries have been paid to the staff. But, for the month of May, 2011, an objection was taken that the Salary Bills have not been signed by the competent person. As seen from the proceedings, dated 30.11.2010, the second petitioner was appointed as Principal, Full Additional Charge, with effect from 01.12.2010 until further orders. As seen from G.O.Ms.No.127, dated 07.06.1993, the posts of Principals of Degree Colleges, Law, Colleges of Education, shall be filled by recruitment by transfer among the eligible qualified and suitable Lecturers with 10 years of service under the same Management and in the absence of such Lecturers by direct recruitment. 6. It is not in dispute before this Court that the second petitioner was originally appointed as Physical Director. By virtue of the proceedings in L.Dis.No.1119/UGC-4/98, dated 20.04.1998, issued by the Director of Collegiate Education, and by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.91 Edn., dated 26.03.1987, the Government ordered that the Physical Directors and Librarians in Degree Colleges in the State who are drawing the scale of pay of Rs.700-1,600/- possess the qualification prescribed in G.O.Ms.Mo.491 Edn., dated 16.11.1984, be re-designated as Lecturers in Physical Education and Lecturers in Library Science respectively with immediate effect. So, when a person is working in the Physical Education Department as Lecturer, he can be a Lecturer within the meaning of Clause (3) of G.O.Ms.No.12 Edn., dated 10.01.1992. The amendment to the said G.O. does not differentiate between a teaching staff and the Lecturer working in the Physical Education Department. Therefore, when a Lecturer of Physical Education Department, who, according to the petitioners is the senior most person in the petitioner institution, was appointed as Principal, Full Additional Charge, of the petitioner institution, he is entitled to sign and process the Salary Bills. Therefore, there shall be a direction to the respondents to process the Salary Bills of the staff of KVR, KVR & MKR College, Khajipalem. 7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ K.C. BHANU, J June 09, 2011 MD IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.15260 OF 2011 Between: KVR, KVR & MKR College, Khagipalem, Guntur District and another .....PETITIONERS AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.15260 OF 2011 June 09, 2011