IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BIKSHAPATHY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA WRIT PETITION NO : 22530 of 2003 Between: G. Shravan Kumar Reddy, S/o. G. Ram Reddy O/o. The Director General of Vigilence and Enforcement, 9th Floor, B.R.K.R. Complex, Near Tankbund, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Industries & Commerce (M.I) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Director of Mines & Gelogy, A.P. 8th Floor, B.R.K.R. Complex, Near Tankbund, Hyderabad. 3 V. Bhaghavantha Reddy, Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Khammam Dist. 4 K. Laxman Babu, Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Palamaneru, Chittoor District. 5 K. Subba Rao, Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. 6 W.B. Chandra Sekhar, Assistant Director of Mines & Geology, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus calling for records relating to the Memo No. 9900/E4/1998, dated 26-5-1998 issued by the 2nd Respondent and the consequential order of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal passed in O.A. No. 3908/98, dated 14-10- 2003 and the consequential orders if any passed by the Official Respondents and set aside the same by holding as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to settled law. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.SURESH REDDY Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2 : GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent No. 3 : Mr.M.Venkat Ram Reddy The Court made the following : ORDER: (per P.S.Narayana.,J) One Koteswara Raju and the present writ petitioner had set the law in motion by filing O.A.No.3908/98 on the file of A.P. Administrative Tribunal, in short referred to as “Tribunal” hereinafter, questioning Memo No.9900/E4/88, dated 26-5-1998 on the ground that the same is arbitrary, illegal, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and the Special Rules in G.O.Ms.No.215, dated 13-5-1970, A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules 1962 and 1996 and without jurisdiction. 2. It may be appropriate to have at look at the impugned Memo in the O.A. which reads as hereunder : GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND GEOLOGY : HYDERABAD *** Memo No.9900/E4/88 Dated : 26-5-1998 Sub: Establishment – Department of Mines and Geology, Hyderabad – Regularisation of Service and Declaration of probation in the category of Inspectors in the District and Regional Offices – Issue of notices to the affected individuals – Reg. *** The attention of the Royalty Inspectors whose names are enlisted in the Annexure enclosed to this informed that the post of Inspector is a District Cadre post and it comes under the purview of Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission. In the year 1986 the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission has sponsored the candidates as per the instructions of the Director of Mines and Geology, the Asst. Directors of Mines and Geology who are appointing authorities have assured appointment orders to the Inspectors so sponsored by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission has furnished the list of candidates so selected for appointment as per the Rank in the combined merit list for both Multi zone I and Multi Zone II put together. The order of merit so given by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission will have to be taken into consideration for the purpose of seniority to regularization of services of the Inspectors have to be done by the Asst. Director of Mines and Geology into Inspector Cadre. But as seen from the regularization proceedings which received from the respective Assistant Directors of Mines and Geology, the Assistant Directors of Mines and Geology have regularized the services of Inspectors from the date of joining duty by Inspectors in their respective offices. This is not correct. The date of regularization of the Inspectors should be strictly in accordance with the merit list communicated by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission as mentioned. In the circumstances stated above, the Royalty Inspectors listed in the Annexure enclosed to this Memo are hereby directed to file their objections, if any against the seniority given in the cadre of Inspectors with effect from 1986 i.e., from the date of sponsoring their names by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission in the year 1986. They should file their objections if any within 15 days from the day of receipt of the Memo, failing which further necessary action will be taken for regularization of services in the cadre of Inspector as per the list communicated by the A.P.P.S.C. in the year 1986. Sd/- DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GELOGY ANNEXURE MULTI ZONE-I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sl.No. Seniority as per date of Seniority now proposed as per Regularisation Service Commission Ranking ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Sri V.Koteswara Raju 1. Sri V.Bhaghavantha Reddy 2. Sri G.Shravan Kumar Reddy 2. Sri K.Laxman Babu 3. Sri K.Laxman Bau 3. Sri K.Subba Rao 4. Sri V.Bhaghavantha Reddy 4. Sri W.B. Chandrashaker 5. Sri K.Subba Rao 5. Sri V.Koteswara Raju 6. Sri W.B. Chandra Shaker 6. Sri G.Shravan Kumar Reddy 7. Sri K.Venkat Rao 7. Sri D.V.V. Suryanarayana Reddy 8. Sri D.V.V.Suryanarayana 8. Sri K.Venkat Rao Reddy MULT ZONE II 1. Sri P.Pullaiah 1. Sri P.Pullaiah 2. Sri M.Sudhakar 2. Sri M.Sudhakar 3. Sri G.Rama Chandra Rao 3. Sri G.Rama Chandra Rao Sd/- Director of Mines and Geology The said O.A.No.3908/98 was dismissed by the Tribunal on 14-10- 2003 and one of the unsuccessful applicants filed the present Writ Petition praying for the relief as hereunder: “For the reasons, grounds and facts stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that the Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of the writ of mandamus calling for records relating to the Memo No.9900/E4/98 dated 26-5-1998 issued by the 2nd respondent and the consequential order of the Hon’ble A.P.Administrative Tribunal passed in O.A.No.3908/98, dated 14-10-2003 and the consequential orders if any passed by the Official Respondents and set aside the same by holding as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to settled law and pass such other or further order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 3. Sri Suresh Reddy, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner had traced the historical background of this litigation and would maintain that though the impugned Memo is a show-cause- notice calling for objections, the same cannot be sustained since the 3rd respondent has no locus at all to make the alleged representation and further the issuance of the impugned memo by the 2nd respondent even suffers from lack of jurisdiction and hence on both the grounds the Tribunal instead of quashing the memo had dismissed the O.A. on unsustainable grounds. The learned Counsel also had traced the dates of regularization and the subsequent promotions and the long lapse of time when the 3rd respondent thought of filing a representation to revise the seniority which had been settled long back. The Counsel also pointed out that the seniority had been settled depending upon the District Units long back and the same shall not be disturbed at this distant point of time by issuing the memo which had been impugned in the O.A. The Counsel also pointed out that the rules at the time of recruitment alone would be applicable and not the subsequent rules. If the District as a Unit is taken into consideration it is clear that the 3rd respondent has no locus at all to maintain the representation questioning the seniority fixed in relation to yet another District only on the ground that at the time of considering for promotion in the hierarchy his promotion chances would be affected. In substance the stand of the Counsel is that due to long lapse of time, the issuance of the impugned memo is definitely bad and also the 3rd respondent of a different Unit altogether cannot make a representation of this nature in pursuance of which the impugned show-cause-notice could have been issued and the same suffers from jurisdictional flaw. If this is permitted the Counsel would maintain that there will be several problems and the litigations would be unending if settled rights are disturbed after a long lapse of time in the way in which it had been sought to be disturbed by the 3rd respondent by making a representation to 2nd respondent and the 2nd respondent issuing a memo which had been called in question. 4. Per contra Sri Prakash Reddy, the learned Counsel had pointed out to the merit list and the mere fact that the writ petitioner and the 3rd respondent are at different District Units would not alter the situation in any way since when time had been given to join and within the time if a candidate joins, the merit of A.P.Public Service Commission is to be taken into consideration and the seniority to be fixed in accordance with the same. The Counsel also pointed out that when the posts are either Zonal posts or Multi Zonal posts or State- wide posts, the mere fact that at the lower hierarchy District would be the Unit would not alter the situation in any way since the integrated seniority list may have to be prepared on the strength of original merit irrespective of the District and the Rules may have to be interpreted only in consonance with the said stand taken by the 3rd respondent and not otherwise. The mere joining, whether prior or late, within the time permitted, would not alter the situation in any way and the merit fixed by the A.P.Public Service Commission cannot be disturbed in such a fashion. This may have to be viewed in the light of the next promotional post and hence neither the question of locus nor the question of jurisdiction are involved in the matter. The Counsel also had pointed out to Rule 33(b) of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules and the Counsel also pointed out that the basis of selection is one and as can be seen the 3rd respondent was at the top in the merit list and Rule 5 of the Adhoc Rules may have to be read in consonance with Rule 33(b) of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules and when the mistake had been detected, rightly the 3rd respondent made a representation and hence in such a matter the delay would be of no consequence. 5. The learned Government Pleader for Services-I had taken this Court through the stand taken in this regard by the Government in the detailed counter affidavit and also had well supported the memo which had been impugned in the O.A. and also the stand taken by the 3rd respondent in this regard. 6. Heard the Counsel. 7. The show-cause-notice calling for objections dated 26-5-1998 had been impugned in the O.A. referred to supra which was dismissed by the Tribunal and aggrieved by the same, one of the unsuccessful applicants had preferred the present Writ Petition and the said show- cause-notice calling for objections why the seniority fixed should not be disturbed is called in question in the O.A. and in the present Writ Petition on the ground that inasmuch as seniority had been fixed about more than 12 years back at the District level, the 3rd respondent belonging to a different District altogether has no locus- standi at all to make the said representation and hence the 2nd respondent has no jurisdiction to issue the impugned Memo. The stand taken by the writ petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition is that the 1st respondent created the post of Inspector (Mines) in the Department of Mines & Geology by framing the Adhoc Rules in G.O.Ms.No.215, dated 13-3-1970. According to these Rules, the posts have to be filled up by direct recruitment. These posts are District cadre posts i.e., the Unit of appointment is Revenue District and the appointing authority is the Assistant Director of Mines & Geology of concerned District. The other categories of posts and Rules are as given below: POSTS RULES 1. Inspector of Mines G.O.Ms.No.215, dated 13-3-1970 2. Technical Assistant G.O.Ms.No.1153, dated 1-2-1973 3. Royalty Inspectors G.O.Ms.No.555, dated 18-6-1976 4. Assistant Geologist G.O.Ms.No.59, dated 10-3-1998 It was further stated that under the Adhoc Rules, an appointment is made to the post of Inspector by direct recruitment and they are eligible for promotion as Technical Assistants after getting experience of not less then two years (not a Selection post) and further promotion to the post of Royalty Inspector is after getting an experience of three years as Technical Assistant (Selection post). Further promotion to the post of Assistant Geologist (State cadre post) is after three years of service in the Department as Royalty Inspector. It was further averred that the Government in G.O.Ms.No.490, dated 1-6-1976, Memo dated 6-12-1976 and G.O.Ms.No.348, dated 11-6-1977 had organized local cadres in the Mines & Geology Department as follows : DISTRICT CADRE 1. Inspector (2) L.D.C. (3) Steno typist etc. MULTI ZONAL CADRE a) Technical Assistants 1. Zones I, II, V and VI 2. Zones III and IV b) Royalty Inspectors 1. Zones I, II, V and VI 2. Zones III and IV From the category of Assistant Geologist and Assistant Director etc., they are State cadre posts covered by special Rules framed in G.O.Ms.No.385, dated 7-5-1979. 8. It was also further averred that the A.P.Public Service Commission notified calling for applications for direct recruitment to 9 vacancies of Mines Inspectors in the year 1985 and held the written examination on 10-1-1986. The writ petitioner and the other applicant in O.A.No.3908/98 and the unofficial respondents were selected pursuant to the exams and the Commission had allotted the writ petitioner, the other applicant in the O.A. and the unofficial respondents to the Unit of appointment (concerned Districts as per Rules) as follows : Name of the Candidate Date of appointment/ District 1. V.Koteshwer Raju Visakhapatnam 2. G.Shravankumar Reddy Hyderabad 3. V.Bhagwanth Reddy Warangal 4. K.Laxman Babu Nalgonda 5. K.Subba Rao East Godavari 6. W.B. Sekher Adilabad Pursuant to the said allotment of the writ petitioner and the other persons i.e., the other applicant in the O.A. and the unofficial respondents the concerned Unit appointing authorities i.e., Assistant Director of Mines & Geology of concerned District, issued appointment orders to the concerned candidates. The details of appointment and regularization in the cadre of Inspector of Mines of applicants are as below: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Starting Declaration Full Member Joining of probation of probation 23(a) 25(b) 29(a) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. 1st Applicant 16-4-86 16-4-86 12-5-88 13-5-88 2. 2nd Applicant 21-4-86 21-4-86 4-7-88 - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Further it is stated that after applicants in O.A. and the unofficial respondents put in required service, they had been promoted to the post of Technical Assistant (non-selection post of Multi Zone I) by integrating the seniority of different Units of appointments (Districts) in the cadre of Inspectors in accordance with Rule 33(a) of General Rules (State and Subordinate Rules, 1962). The applicants in O.A. had been regularized in the cadre of Technical Assistants as follows : TECHNICAL ASSISTANTS ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Starting of Declaration of Probation Joining Probation 25(a) 25(b) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. 1st Applicant 13-5-88 13-5-88 20-5-89 2. 2nd Applicant 1-6-88 5-7-88 4-8-89 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As the applicants in O.A. and unofficial respondents having the eligibility and qualifications were promoted to the next post of Royalty Inspectors, the writ petitioner was promoted as Royalty Inspector by an order dated 16-10-1990 and he joined on 13-11-1990. The 2nd applicant in O.A. and the unofficial respondents were promoted as Royalty Inspectors by order dated 23-3-1991 and all the persons are working as Royalty Inspectors in Multi Zone I as on the date of filing of the O.A. While making all these promotions the integrated seniority list from the cadre of Inspectors prepared in accordance with General Rule 33(a) by taking the date of regularization in the cadre of Inspectors was taken into account wherein the applicants in O.A. are at S.Nos.1 and 2 respectively and the unofficial respondents are at S.Nos.3 to 6. It was further averred that now there are vacancies in the cadre of Assistant Geologists, a State cadre post and the applicants in O.A. are eligible and qualified and should be considered for promotion. 9. It was further averred that at this stage the 3rd respondent filed a representation dated 17-4-1998 to the 2nd respondent (Head of the Department) to alter the dates of regularization in the cadre of Inspectors as per the list communicated by the A.P.Public Service Commission and to modify the seniority accordingly. Pursuant to the said representation of the 3rd respondent, the 2nd respondent- Director of Mines & Geology, A.P. issued the impugned Memo No.9900/E4/98, dated 26-5-1998 calling for objections from the applicants against the intended action for regularization of services in the cadre of Inspectors as per the list communicated by the A.P.Public Service Commission and the 2nd respondent-The Director of Mines & Geology is intending to change the date of regularization of the applicants given by the appointing authority of the concerned Unit i.e., the Assistant Director of Mines & Geology of concerned District from the date of joining as Inspectors by altering the dates in accordance with the list communicated by A.P. Public Service Commission for the Multi Zones. 10. In the counter affidavit filed by respondents 1 and 2, substantially the same stand as taken before the Tribunal had been reiterated. It was averred that on the request of the 3rd respondent to fix seniority based on the ranking assigned by A.P.Public Service Commission in the year 1986 to the 2nd respondent, revised provisional seniority list was prepared and communicated to the writ petitioner and others by Memo No.9900/E4/88, dated 26-5-1998 to file objections within 15 days from the date of receipt of the memo. It is also further stand taken in this regard that the posts of Inspectors are governed by Adhoc Rules issued by G.O.Ms.No.215, Industries & Commerce, dated 13-3-1970. According to the Rules, the post of Mines Inspector is to be filled by direct recruitment and these posts are District cadre posts. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology concerned in the District is the appointing authority and Mines Inspectors are having promotional channel as under: From Inspector to Technical Assistant From Technical Assistant to Royalty Inspector From Royalty Inspector to Assistant Geologist etc. It is further the stand taken in the counter affidavit that the post of Technical Assistant was also governed by Adhoc Rules in G.O.Ms.No.1153, dated 1-2-1978. The post of Royalty Inspector is governed by Adhoc Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.555, dated 6-8-1976 of Mining Subordinate Service Rules. Subsequently, the Government issued revised A.P. Mining Subordinate Service Rules in G.O.Ms.No.205, Industries & Commerce (MI) Department dated 22-6- 1999 for recruitment to the post of Technical Assistants, Royalty Inspectors. Likewise, the posts of Assistant Geologists and Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Director of Mines and Geology which are State-wide posts are governed by Special Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.59, Industries & Commerce Department dated 10-3-1998. The post of Inspector in the Department was a direct recruitment post and according to the Adhoc Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.215, dated 13-3-1970 the educational qualification prescribed was B.Sc. in Geology. The Mines Inspectors were eligible for promotion to the post of Technical Assistant after having put in minimum service of two years. Likewise, the Technical Assistants are eligible for promotion to the post of Royalty Inspector after putting in three years of service. Further, the Royalty Inspector is eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Geologist, Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Joint Director of Mines and Geology, Director of Mines and Geology which is a state-wide Gazetted post after putting in three years of service in the feeder category. 11. It was further stated that after promulgation of the Presidential Order i.e., Six Points Formula, all the Non-Gazetted Officer posts had been organized under local cadres and to this effect Government issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.490, dated 1-6-1976 read with Memo No.887, Industries & Commerce Department dated 6-12-1976 and G.O.Ms.No.348, Industries & Commerce Department, dated 11-6- 1977. According to the localization, Inspectors, Lower Divisional Clerk, Typists and Steno-Typists Posts are organized as District cadre posts. Similarly, the Technical Assistant and Royalty Inspectors had been organized into Multi-Zone Cadres. The Multi Zone-I consists of Zones I, II, V and VI. Multi Zone II consists of Zones III and IV. Assistant Geologist, Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Deputy Director of Mines and Geology, Joint Director of Mines and Geology, Director of Mines and Geology are State-wide posts governed by Special Rules framed in G.O.Ms.No.385, Industries & Commerce (M.1) Department, dated 7-5-1979 read with G.O.Ms.No.59, Industries & Commerce (M.I) Department dated 10-3- 1998. It was further stated that Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission in the year 1985, notified 9 vacancies of Mines Inspectors and thereafter held written examinations on 10-1-1986 and Sri G.Shravan Kumar Reddy and other applicants in the O.A. were selected by Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission. The Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission vide their Letter No.1258/36/86 dated 3-4-1986 allotted them in the order of merit to the following Districts: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sl. Name Name of the District Date of joining No. to which allotted at District Office ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SARVASRI 1. Habibullah Khan Kadapa Not joined 2. V.Bhagavantha Warangal 15-5-1986 3. D.Subba Rao Vijayanagaram Not joined 4. K.Lakshmana Babu Nalgonda 1-5-1986 5. K.Subba Rao East Godavari 26-5-1986 6. P.Pullaiah Anantapur 2-5-1986 7. W.B.Chandra Sekhar Adilabad 12-6-1986 8. V.Koteswara Raju Visakhapatnam 16-4-1986 9. G.Shravan Kumar Reddy Hyderabad 21-4-1986 10. D.V.V.Satyanarayana Reddy Krishna 13-12-1986 11. M.Sudhakar Guntur 18-11-1988 12. G.Ramachandra Rao Kurnool 3-12-1988 13. K.Venkata Rao Krishna 24-12-1988 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As per the above list communicated by A.P. Public Service Commission Sri V.Bhagavantha Reddy stands first in the merit lit whereas Sri V.Koteswara Raju and Sri G.Shravan Kumar Reddy figure 8th and 9th in the list. The concerned Assistant Director of Mines and Geology of the respective Districts regularized their services from the date of their joining as Mines Inspector as mentioned above. As such, the services of Sri V.Koteswara Raju and Sri G.Shravan Kumar Reddy were regularized in the category of Mines Inspector earlier to Sri V.Bhagavantha Reddy which is contrary to merit list communicated by the A.P. Public Service Commission. It was further stated that the candidates who had been regularized in the cadre of Mines Inspector were later on promoted to the posts of Technical Assistant and their services were regularized in the said category. Thereafter the applicant also was promoted to the post of Royalty Inspectors through proceeding No.11551/F1/86 of Director of Mines and Geology and he was permitted to join duty as Royalty Inspector on 4-3-1997. They were working as Royalty Inspectors in Multi Zone I on the date of filing the O.A. The seniority list in the category of Technical Assistants was prepared by integrating the seniority of different unit of appointments (Districts) in the cadre of Mines Inspectors. This was contrary to the ranking given/assigned by the A.P. Public Service Commission in their letter No.1258/36 dated 3-4-1986. Therefore the 3rd respondent requested to give him appropriate seniority in the category of Technical Assistants and Royalty Inspectors based on the ranking assigned by A.P. Public Service Commission in the cadre of Mines Inspector. In pursuance of this, the seniority was provisionally revised in Memo No.9900/E4/88 dated 26-5-1998 and communicated to all the concerned to file objections within 15 days of receipt of the above memo. But before exhausting the remedy available to them in the statute, they rushed to the Tribunal and the Tribunal dismissed the O.A. as premature. As per Rule 36 (old Rule 33(f)(a)) of A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, the seniority of the persons shall be determined (i) in respect