IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL Nos.355 of 2001, 816 and 856 of 2002. WRIT APPEAL NO : 355 of 2001 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated ______ in WP NO : 4128 OF 1993 on the file of the High Court.) Between: ..... APPELLANT(S) AND .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.V.VENKATARAMANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.PANDURANGA RAO The Court made the following : WRIT APPEAL NO : 816 of 2002 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated ______ in WP NO : 5128 OF 2002 on the file of the High Court.) Between: The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Education Department Rep by its Secretary Hyderabad. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 G.Anand Kumar S/o.G.Narasimha R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 2 K.Balakrishna Reddy S/o.K.Subba Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 3 R.Chandra Sekhar S/o.R.Murthppa R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 4 N.G.Chandra Sekhar S/o.Newartha Narayana R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 5 A.Siva Prasad S/o.A.Sanjeevarayudu R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 6 A.Sivasankar Reddy S/o.R.Chinnapa Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 7 B.Ramakrishna S/o.R.Chinnapa Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 8 K.Venkatasiva Reddy S/o.K.Lakshminarayana Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 9 M.Pratap Reddy S/o.N.Sanjeeva Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 10 K.Ramgopal Reddy S/o.K.Chenchi Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 11 D.Ramagangi Reddy S/o.D.Narayana Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 12 G.Jayachandra Reddy S/o.Subba Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 13 U.Mohd.Ali S/o.Subba Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 14 P.M.Venkatesarlu S/o.M.Murthy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 15 E.Lakshmikanthappa S/o.E.Eramalappa R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 16 T.S.Syamsundar S/o.T.Seshacharyulu R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 17 G.Udayabhaskar Reddy S/o.G.Kesava Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 18 Smt.M.Nagajyothi W/o.M.C.Ranga Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 19 Kum.B.Sreelatha D/o.B.Venkatesulu R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 20 G.Venkatramudu S/o.G.Naganna R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 21 Kum.Y.Rajamma D/o.Y.Wiswanatham R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 22 V.Govinda Reddy S/o.V.Anjaiah R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 23 J.Abdul Jeelam S/o.H.Jajeer Peeran R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 24 K.Maheswara Reddy S/o.K.Lakshmana Reddy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 25 Smt.G.Leelavathi W/o.G.D.Narayana Swamy R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 26 V.Adinarayana Reddy S/o.V.Ramaiah R/o.Anantapur, Anantapur District. 27 The Registrar Sri Krishnadevaraya University Anantapur, Anantapur District. (R27 is not necessary in this Appeal) .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:GP FOR FINANCE & PLANNING Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.PANDURANGA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO : 856 of 2002 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated ______ in WP NO : 4128 OF 1993 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Sri Krishnadevaraya University, rep by its Registrar, Anantapur District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 G Anand Kumar S/o G Narsimha R/o Anantapur District. 2 K Balakrishna Reddy S/o K Subba Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 3 R Chandra Shekhar S/o R Murthppa R/o Anantapur District. 4 N G Chandra Shekhar S/o Newartha Narayana R/o Anantapur District. 5 A Siva prasad S/o A Sanjeevaraidu R/o Anantapur District. 6 A Siva Sankar Reddy S/o R Chinnappa Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 7 B Ramakrishna S/o R Chinnappa Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 8 K Venkata Siva Reddy S/o Laxmi Narayana Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 9 M Pratap Reddy, S/o N Sanjeev Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 10 K Ramagopal Reddy S/o K Chenchi Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 11 D Ramagangi Reddy S/o D Narayana Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 12 G Jayachandra Reddy S/o Subba Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 13 U Mohd Ali S/o Subba Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 14 T M Venkateswarlu S/o M Murthy R/o Anantapur District. 15 E Lakshmikanthappa S/o E Eramalappa R/o Anantapur District. 16 T S Syamsunder S/o T Sesacharyuly R/o Anantapur District. 17 G Udaya Bhaskar Reddy, S/o G Kesava Reddy, R/o Anantapur District. 18 Smt M Naga Jyothi S/o M C Ranga Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 19 Kum. b Sreelatha D/o B Venkatesulu R/o Anantapur District. 20 G Venkatramudu S/o G Naganna R/o Anantapur District. 21 Kum Y Rajamma, D/o Y Viswanatham R/o Anantapur District. 22 V Govinda Reddy S/o V Anjaiah R/o Anantapur District. 23 J Abdulo Jeelam S/o Jajeer Peeran R/o Anantapur District. 24 K Maheshwara Reddy S/o K Lakshmana Reddy R/o Anantapur District. 25 Smt G Leelavathi S/o G D Narayana Swamy R/o Anantapur District. 26 V Adinarayana Reddy S/o V Ramaiah R/o Anantapur District. 27 The Government of A.P. rep by its Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:MR.M.RAMALINGESWARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.PANDURANGA RAO The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL Nos.355 OF 2001, 816 AND 856 OF 2002 COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge in directing the Registrar, Sri Krishnadevaraya University, Anantapur to submit proposals to the State Government to regularize the services of the writ petitioners without insisting on the existence of clear vacancies as stipulated in Clause 5 of G.O.Ms.No.212, dated 22.04.1994, but subject to fulfillment of all other conditions stipulated therein and on the rule of reservation being followed while fixing interse seniority among them, the present writ appeals are filed. The learned Single Judge had also held that, on regularization of their services, the petitioners were entitled to count the service for the purpose of seniority and other attendant benefits like terminal and pensionary benefits which were being extended to the regular employees of the University. While noting that this Court had earlier passed an order dated 23.09.1993 directing the respondents to pay regular time scale of pay attached to the posts in which the petitioners were working, the learned Single Judge held that no orders were being passed with regards monetary benefits except to observe that the University was under an obligation to pay the time of scale of pay attached to the posts in which the petitioners were working. Around 22 employees, working in the cadre of Junior Assistants in Krishnadevaraya University, have obtained leave to file these appeals against the order of the learned Single Judge. They would contend that regularization of the services of the petitioners was contrary to the rules and that, under the guise of the order of regularization, the petitioners were stealing a march over them in the matter of seniority, thereby affecting the appellants chances of promotion to the next higher posts of Senior Assistants. A copy of the proceedings of the University dated 20.05.2001 is placed before this Court which reveals that the University had appointed the petitioners, who were Office Assistants, as Junior Assistants in the scale of pay of Rs.3290-6550 besides usual allowances. The petitioners appointment was made subject to certain conditions, one among them being that the petitioners, who were regularized, were required to give an undertaking to the University to the effect that they accepted appointment as Junior Assistants with effect from the date of issue of the orders and that they were agreeable to be placed at the bottom of the seniority list in the cadre of Junior Assistant. Sri Vedula Venkataramana, learned Counsel for the appellants, would refer to subsequent events to contend that the petitioners were being given preference and were being considered for promotions as Senior Assistants prior to the appellants herein. On being asked as to how the appellants were aggrieved by the order of regularization dated 20.05.2001, more so when the petitioners were required to accept appointment as Junior Assistants and to be placed at the bottom of the seniority list in the cadre of Junior Assistants, Sri Vedula Venkataramana, learned Counsel for the appellants, would fairly state that while the appellants cannot be said to be aggrieved if the order is strictly adhered to, the appointment of the petitioners is nonetheless contrary to the rules. A perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petitions would show that the petitioners were working as Office Assistants on N.M.R. basis. While the orders do not prescribe any post of Office Assistant, the lowest post, among the several posts specified in the rules, is that of a Record Assistant. As to whether the petitioners could have been regularized as Junior Assistants instead of as Record Assistants is itself debatable. We do not, however, propose to go into this question since the proceedings of the University dated 20.05.2001 clearly shows that the appointment of the petitioners as Junior Assistants is on the condition that they accept bottom seniority in the cadre of Junior Assistants. Once this condition is strictly implemented, the appellants herein cannot be said to suffer any prejudice since the petitioners would be placed below them in the seniority list of Junior Assistants. Ends of justice would meet if the order of the learned Single Judge is modified to the limited extent that, in accordance with the proceedings of the University dated 20.05.2001, the petitioners, who were regularized pursuant to the orders of the learned Single Judge, shall be placed at the bottom of the seniority list of Junior Assistants consequent upon regularization of their services. The Writ Appeals are accordingly disposed of directing the respondent University, while regularizing the services of the petitioners, to place them at the bottom of the seniority list of Junior Assistants from the date of regularization of their services. No costs. _______________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. Date: 07.07.2008 _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. GS/ASP