IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17855 of 1999 Between: 1 Govt. of A.P., rep.by its Prl. Secretary to Govt. Revenue (Endowments-I) Department Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 Commissioner Endowments Department A.P., Hyderabad 3 Executive Engineer Endowments Department A.P., Hyderabad ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 T.B.V.Subrahmanyeswara Rao O/o.The Commissioner of Endowments Tilak Road, Boggulakunta, Hyderabad 2 The A.P.Admn. Tribunal rep.by its Registrar, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the order Dt.22/9/98 passed in OA.No.2521/96 on the file of the A.P.Administrative Tribunal and quash or set aside the same as illwegal and erroneous and contrary to law and pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.D.V.BHADRAM The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TPK} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.17855 of 1999 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Swaroop Reddy) This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in O.A.2521/1996, dated 22.09.1998. The petitioners are the respondents in the said O.A. The 1st respondent/applicant filed the O.A. for quashing the Memo No.E7/22644/94, dated 03.04.1996 issued by the Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad, declaring it as illegal and arbitrary and against the instructions of the G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994 and G.O.Ms.No.330, dated 24.09.1994, besides being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The case of the 1st respondent/applicant is that he was appointed as Junior Assistant in the time scale in the year 1982 in Silpa Kalasala and continued in the said cadre till 1985. When Silpa Kalasala was wound up, he was taken to Budha Project under the Endowments Department and his appointment was ratified by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.868, GA dated 12.03.1987. Later, the Endowments Department submitted proposals dated 23.06.1992 for his absorption as Junior Assistant as he was working as Junior Assistant in the Department for several years. But under the impugned proceedings dated 03.04.1996, he was asked to give consent for appointment as Attender under G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994. According to the applicant, G.O.Ms.No.212 is not applicable to his case, since he was not appointed as NMR/part-time contingent/daily wage employee. He was initially appointed as Junior Assistant in the time scale on temporary basis. As Budha Project was to be wound up, he was asked to give consent for appointment as an Attender in the Head Office as he passed only Intermediate and not Graduation which is required for appointment as Junior Assistant in the Head Office, as per rules. A counter was filed before the Tribunal on behalf of the present petitioners who are the respondents in O.A., contending that in pursuance of the interim orders dated 23.04.1996 the applicant was absorbed as Junior Assistant in the office of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Chittoor which is under the control of the Commissioner of Endowments and hence the interim orders of the Tribunal have been implemented and prayed that the O.A may be dismissed. The relief sought for by the 1st respondent/applicant in the O.A. was for regularization of his services from 22.11.1982 i.e. from the date of his initial appointment. We have heard both the counsel appearing on either side. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that as the 1st respondent/applicant was temporarily appointed in Budha Project vide orders dated 19.02.1986, after winding up of the Project his services stood terminated and he cannot be given any seniority from 19.02.1986. The main grievance of the 1st respondent/applicant is that he cannot be asked to give consent for appointment as an Attender as he has been working as Junior Assistant since several years. We are of the opinion that asking the petitioner to give consent for appointment as an Attender is totally unjustified as he was initially appointed as Junior Assistant in 1982 in Silpakalasa and thereafter appointed as Junior Assistant in 1986 in Budha Project. As per the counter filed by the petitioners herein in OA, the applicant was absorbed as Junior Assistant in the office of the Assistant Commissioner, Endowments Department, Chittoor. The contention that for appointment as Junior Assistant in the Head Office, the minimum qualification required is graduation and the petitioner is not entitled for appointment as Junior Assistnat as he passed only Intermediate would not come in the way in view of the fact that he was appointed in the office of the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Chittoor and not in the Head Office. In so far as the issue of seniority is concerned, the applicant was initially appointed as Junior Assistant on 22.11.1982 in Silpakalasa and after its winding up, he was given appointment as Junior Assistant in Budha Project on 19.02.1986. The appointment order dated 19.02.1986 reflects that the applicant was given appointment afresh on temporary basis, but not given appointment on transfer or on deputation etc. If the petitioner was taken to Budha Project on transfer or deputation after winding up of Silpakalasala, he is entitled to claim seniority from the date of his initial appointment i.e. from 22.11.1982. As the petitioner was given appointment afresh on temporary basis, as per the appointment order dated 19.02.1986, the question of granting any seniority from 22.11.1982 does not arise. The seniority of the applicant cannot be reckoned from his initial appointment i.e. from 22.11.1982 but it shall be reckoned only from 19.02.1986. In the circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of, modifying the order of the Tribunal with regard to date that has to be taken into consideration for regularization of services of the applicant as 19.02.1986 only. No order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J ____________________________ P.SWAROOP REDDY,J Dated: 24.06.2009 Dsr .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The A.P.Admn. Tribunal rep.by its Registrar, Hyderabad 2 2. 2CCs to 3. 2CD copies