Allowed

The District Educational Officer, v. Smt. S.Padmavathi

Telangana HC15 Sept 2014WP/21228/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by the Government against a Tribunal order that had fixed a government servant's seniority based on her original appointment date. The Court held that because the transfer from Nizamabad to Nalgonda Units was initiated on the servant's own request rather than administrative grounds, her seniority must be reckoned from the date of joining the new unit, r

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed. Impugned Tribunal order set aside. No order as to costs.

The District Educational Officer, Vs Smt… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.21228 OF 2002

¶3

ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu)

¶4

This writ petition is filed challenging the order, dated 16.9.2002, in O.A.No.8523 of 2002 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short, “the Tribunal”).

¶5

2. Respondent herein/applicant filed the aforementioned Original Application before the Tribunal to declare that that she is entitled to have her seniority reckoned with reference to her date of first appointment i.e., 19.3.1982 with all consequential benefits such as seniority, promotion etc. in terms of the Special Rules issued through G.O.Ms.No.538, dated 20.11.1998, and also in terms of the judgment, dated 12.10.2001, in O.A.Nos.6886 of 2001 and 7950 of 2000, and consequently, to set aside the proceedings, dated 2.9.2002, of the petitioner herein by declaring the action of the petitioner herein as illegal and arbitrary.

¶6

3. The Tribunal, upon considering the material on record, disposed of the aforementioned Original Application directing the petitioner herein to fix the seniority of the respondent/applicant as per the original appointment i.e., 19.3.1982 in Nizamabad and held that the date of joining in Nizamabad should be the basis for reckoning the seniority as per Rules 33 and 36 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 (for short, “the Rules”) and also directed to grant consequential benefits within a period of two (2) weeks from that day. Challenging the same, Government filed the present writ petition.

¶7

4. Heard the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the petitioner.

¶8

5. The short point that falls for consideration in this writ petition is with regard to the counting of the former service rendered by the respondent/applicant at Nizamabad Unit for the purpose of seniority, promotion etc. The respondent was transferred to Nalgonda Unit on her own request. It is not in dispute that she was initially appointed as Hindi Pandit Grade-II in Nizamabad District. Hindi Pandit Grade-II is a district unit appointment. On 4.9.1991, she was transferred from Nizamabad Unit to Nalgonda Unit on her own request. That is not denied or disputed. Under Rule 35(a) & (b) of the Rules, if a person is transferred from one unit to another on administrative grounds, the past service can be counted to the present service whereas when the transfer is made on his own, the seniority shall be fixed with reference to the date of his joining duty in the latter unit of appointment.

¶9

Rule 35 of the Rules reads as under:-

¶10

“35. Fixation of seniority in the case of transfers on request or on administrative grounds:-

¶11

(a) The seniority of a member of a service, class or category transferred from one unit of appointment to another unit of appointment, on administrative grounds, shall be, determined with reference to the date of seniority of such member in the former unit.

¶12

(b) The seniority of a member of a service, class or category, who is transferred on his own request from one unit of appointment to another unit of appointment shall be fixed with reference to the date of his joining duty in the latter unit of appointment.”

¶13

In view of the above Rule, it is clear that as the transfer of the respondent/applicant is made from Nizamabad Unit to Nalgonda Unit on her own request, she is not entitled for the past service rendered by her in Nizamabad Unit so as to count the same for her seniority for the service rendered by her in Nalgonda Unit. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

¶14

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶15

______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU

¶16

_______________ JUSTICE ANIS Date: 15.9.2014 AMD

¶17

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS

¶18

WRIT PETITION No.21228 OF 2002

¶19

DATE: 15.9.2014

¶20

AMD

The District Educational Officer, v. Smt. S.Padmavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The District Educational Officer, v. Smt. S.Padmavathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pinnamaneni Anitha Krishna Rao Vs The Government of India

P. Koteswara Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

V.Ranga Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Vs N. Narendra Kumar

B. Suresh Babu Vs Commissioner of Industries of Andhra Pradesh

M/s Idea Cellular Limited Vs Hail Mohan