Allowed

Chanda Satyanarayana v. The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Telangana HC28 Feb 2025WP/5333/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Technical officers of the Irrigation department challenged reversion orders passed years after their promotions, based on a suspended Circular Memo and a prospective 2018 G.O. The Court held belated reversions unsustainable since settled seniority cannot be unsettled and ITI DM (Civil) was recognised qualification, and set aside all impugned reversion proceedings without costs.

What did the court decide?

All impugned reversion proceedings were set aside; petitioners to continue in their promoted posts; no costs.

Chanda Satyanarayana Vs The State of Telangana and… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

t³³⁰⁰ l

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NOS:^'10172 OF 2018 25550 27950_2 7973 AND 279840F 2019 612 623 1 189 1t9t 12'.t5 s333 AND 63250F 2020

¶7

W.P.NO: 10172OF 2018

¶8

Between:

¶9

G.Ramesh, s/o. Narsaiah, Aged about 44 yea,s, occ Technical Officer^(D.M. Grade l), O/o. The Administrator-cum-Chief Engineer, SRSP, LMD Colony, Karimnagar on Deputation to Executive Engineer, Division No.l, GVC.4, Sulthanabad, Karimnagar.

¶10

AND

¶11

...PETTTTONER

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, lrrigation and CAD Department, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad - 5OO O22.

¶13

The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn) lrrigation and CAD, Department Jala Soudha, Erramanzil, Hyderabad - 500 082.

¶14

The Administrator cum Chief Engineer, SRSP, LMD Colony, Karimnagar.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Anicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Wiit of Mandamus declaring the action of second respondent in issuing impugned Circular Memo No.RC/ENC|E2|16121095/2016 dated 24.O7.2017 directing reversion and the consequential Memo No.ACE/SRSP/E/523/ 2017-18, dated 07 .02.2018 of the third respondent in seeking to implement the second respondent order for reversion of the^petitioner to the lowest^post by way of notice as arbitrary, illegal, being in violation of the principles of natural^justice and set aside the same.

¶17

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶19

Petition under Section^'151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the impugned circular Memo NO. RC/ ENC / E2l 1612109512016 dated 24-07-2017 issued by second respondent and consequential Memo NO. ACE/SRSP/ El 52312017-18 dated 07 -O2-2O18 of the third respondent, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. K.V.RA.IASREE Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES I

¶21

W.P.O: 25550 OF 2019

¶22

Between:

¶23

G.Ramesh, S/o Narasaiah, Age. 46 years, Occ.Technical Officer (D.M. Grade l) O/o The Administrator-cum- Chief Engineer, SRSP, LMD Colony, Karminagar Wo.7-1-3O2, Mankamma Thota, Karimnagar- 505001

¶24

...permoren

¶25

AND

¶26

State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, lrrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad-500002

¶27

The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn), lrrigation and CAD Department, Jala Soudha, Erramanzil, Hyderabad- 500082

¶28

Administrator-cum- Chief Engineer, Sriramasagar Project, LMD Colony, Karminagar

¶29

...RESPONDENTS

¶30

Petition under A.rlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an Order, Direclion or Writ, more particularly a Writ of Certiorari calling for all the connected records in the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide Proc.No.ACE/SRSlNLMDlEl523l2019-20-1, dated 0611112019 reverting the Petitioner as Assistant Technical Officer from Technical Officer as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and cadrary to law.

¶31

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶32

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide

¶33

'.I

¶34

Proc.No.ACE/SRSP/MD/523/2019-201-1,^{dated0611112019 by continuingthe} Petitioner as Technical Officer,^{forthwith pending disposalof the Writ Petition.}

¶35

lA NO: 'l OF 2020

¶36

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High Court may be pleasedto post} the Writ Petition for being mentioned^{in tomorrow'slist to modify the order dated} 20.12.2019.

¶37

lA NO: 2 oF 2020

¶38

Between:

¶39

State of Telangana, Rep.^{by its Principal Secretary to Government, lnigation} and CAD Department, Secietariat^{Buildings, Hyderabad-500002}

¶40

The Engineei-in-Cnief lnomn),^{lrrigationand CAD Department,Jala Soudha,} Erramanzil, Hyderabad-⁵⁰⁰⁰⁸²

¶41

Adminiskaior--cum- Chief^{Engineer,Sriramasagar Pro.iect,LMD Colony'} Karminagar ...peiinorensl RESPONDENTS

¶42

AND

¶43

G.Ramesh, S/o Narasaiah,^{Age. 46 years,Occ.Technical Officer (Q.M} -Grade l) O/o The Administrator-cum- Chief^{Engineer,SRSP, LMD Colony'} Karminagar^{P/o.7 -1 -3O2, MankammaThota, Karimnagar-505001}

¶44

...RESPONDENT/ PETITIONER

¶45

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the High Court may be pleasedto} vacate the interim order daled 20.12.2019^{in l.A.No. 1 of 2019 in W.P.No.25550 of} 2019.

¶46

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s^{K.KIRAN MAYEE} Counsel for the Respondents:^{GP FOR SERVICESI}

¶47

¶48

W.P.NO: 27950 OF 2019

¶49

Between:

¶50

Smt. B.Seethanjali, wife of Sri N.Venkataiah, aged 45 years, Occupation Technical Offlcer, O/o. The Executive Engineer, NSLBC, b and M Division, Kallur, Khammam District, Ryo. H.No.15-1 8-26311, Prashanthi Nagar, Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam, Khammam District SO7OO2.

¶51

...PET|T|ONER

¶52

AND

¶53

The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶54

The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶55

The Superintending Eng]neer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶56

The Executive Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Division, Kalluru, Khammam District.

¶57

...RESPONDENTS

¶58

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a.Writ in the nature of. Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing Proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T.Paily/AB/EC-5/11975 dated O9t12t2O19 reversing the Petitioner from the post of rechnical officer to the post of Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31 lrrigation and CAD (Services l) Department dated 2510412018 i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering subordinate Service Rules, 2018, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC-5/1 197S dated Ogt1212019 issued by the Respondents, consequently direct the respondents to extend all benefits attached to the post of Technical Officer.

¶59

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶60

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T paily/AB/EC-5/1 197S dated 0911212019 issued by the Respondents, pending disposal of the main writ petition and extend all benefits attached to the post of Technical Officer and pass

¶61

lA NO: 1 OF 2O2O

¶62

Between:

¶63

The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶64

The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶65

The Superintending Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶66

The Executive Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Division, Kalluru, Khammam District'

¶67

...pETraoNERs/REspoNDENTS

¶68

AND

¶69

Smt. B.Seethaniali, wife of Sri N.Venkataiah, aged 45 years, Occupation Technical Officer, O/o. The Executive Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Division, Kallur, Khammam District, R/o. H.No.15-18-26317, Prashanthi Nagar, Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam, Khammam District 507002.

¶70

... RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶71

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order daled 18.12.2019 in W-P.No.27950 of 2019. '

¶72

counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY coun sel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-I/ GP FOR SERVICES-II

¶73

W.P.NO: 27973 OF 2019

¶74

Between:

¶75

Smt. G. Jayamma, Wo. M.Raja, aged 46 years, Occupation- Technical Officer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapalli, Khammam District, Rl/o. H.No.56-97/3, Pakabanda Bazat, Khammam, Khammam District

¶76

...PETITIONER

¶77

AND

¶78

The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶79

The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Enamanjil, Hyderabad.

¶80

T_he Superintending Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶81

...RESPONDENTS

¶82

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a-. appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a Writ in the

¶83

nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing Proceedings bearing No.SE/NSILBC/T.Pally/AB/EC-5/1198S dated Ogl1212O19 reversing the Petitioner from the post of Technical Officer to the post of Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31 lrrigation and CAD (Services l) Department daled 2510412018 i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering Subordinate Servrce Rules, 2018, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC-S/'1198S dated 09112120'19 issued by the Respondents, declare that the petitioner is entitle to continue as Technical Officer, consequently direct the respondents to consequently direct the respondents to extend all benefits attached to the post of Technical Officer.

¶84

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶85

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be. pleased to suspend the proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T.Pa||y/AB/EC-5/1198S dated Ogl12l2O19 issued by the Respondents, pending disposal of the main writ petition.

¶86

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶87

Between:

¶88

The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶89

The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶90

The Superintending Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶91

...PET]TIONERS/RESPONDENTS

¶92

AND

¶93

Smt. G. Jayamma, W/o. M.Rala, aged 46 years, Occupation- Technical Officer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapalli, Khammam District, Rt/o. H.No. 5- 6-9713, Pakabanda Bazat, Khammam, Khammam District

¶94

...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER

¶95

Petition under Section^.151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 18.12.2019 in W.P.No.27973 of 2019.

¶96

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T.SUDHAKAR^REDOY Counsel for the Respondents: GP^{FOR SERVICES-U GP FORSERVICES'II}

¶97

W.P.NO: 279E4OF 2019

¶98

Between:

¶99

V. Srinivasa Rao, S/o. late Surya Narayana, Aged 45^years, Occ-^Assislant Technical Officer, Oio. .Superintending Engineer, NSLBC O^{And M Circle,} Tekulapalli, Khammam, Rl/o. H.No. 12-4-312,^{T.N.G.Os.Colony,} Raparthynagar- ll, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶100

...'ET.T'ONER

¶101

AND

¶102

The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to^Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶103

The Engineer -in- e hief, lrrigation And CAD^Department, Jalasoudha^Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶104

The Superintending Engineer, NSLBC O And^{M Circle, Takulapally,} Khammam' Khammam District

¶105

...RES'.NDENTS

¶106

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^{praying.that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Coirrt maybe} pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a Writ in the nalure of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing impugned proceedings No. SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC.5/1 199 S daled 911212019 to the post Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 31 lrrigation And CAD^(Services l) Department dated 251O412O18 i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, 2018, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles¹⁴ and¹⁶ of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the^{proceedings No.} SE/NSLBC/T.PallylABlEC.5l1199 S dated 911212019, direct the respondents the petitioner is entitle to continue as Assistant Technical Officer, consequently direct the respondents to extend all benefits attached to the^post of^{Assistant Technical} Officer including further^promotion.

¶107

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶108

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the^{HighCourt may be pleasedto} suspend the proceedings No. SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC.5/1^199-Sdated 911212019^pending disposal of the above Writ^Petition.

lA NO: 1 OF 2o2o

Between:

The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶113

The Engineer -in- Chief, Inigation And CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶114

The Superintending Eng_ineer, NSLBC O And M Circle, Takulapalty, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶115

...PETITIONERS/ RESPONDENTS AND

¶116

V- Srinivasa Rao, S/o. late Surya Narayana, Aged 45 years, Occ- Assistant Technical Officer, O/o. Superintending Engineer, NSLBC O And M Circle, Tekulapalli, Khammam, R9_, H.No. - 12-4-312, T.N.G.Os. Cotony, Raparthynagar- ll, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶117

...RESPONDENT/ PETITIONER

¶118

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim dated 18.12,2019 in W.P.No27984 of 2019.

¶119

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: cP FOR SERVTCES-U GP FOR SERVICES-il

¶120

W.P.NO:612OF 2020

¶121

Between:

¶122

N.Vinod Chaitanya, S/o Late N.G.Srinivas Rao, Age. 41 yearc, Occ. Assistant Technical Officer, O/o. Executive Engineer, NSLBC, - O and M Division, T-ekulapally, Khammam, R/o H.No.16-7-1 9214, Sri Gokula Krishna Nilayam, Madhura Khammam-507002 Nagar -Colony, Road No. 10, Gollagudem Road, Rotary Nigar,

¶123

...pETrroNER

¶124

AND

¶125

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,

¶126

_^{lrrigationand CAD Department,SecretariatBuildings,Hyderabad-500002} 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn), lrrigation and CAD Depahment, Jala Soudha, Erramanzil. Hyderabad- 500082

¶127

The Superintending Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally, Khammam-507001

¶128

...RESPONDENTS

¶129

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, Direction or writ, more particularly a writ of certiorari

¶130

¶131

'tft

¶132

calling for all the connected^{records in the impugned Proceedingsof the3rd} Respondent vide Proc.No.SE/NSLBC/T.PallylABIEC-5112O0S,^{dated o911212019} reverting the Petitioner as Junior^{TechnicalofficerfromAssistantTechnical} Officer as illegal, improper, unjust,^{arbitrary and contrary to law.}

¶133

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶134

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the High Court may be pleasedto} suspend the operatlon of the^{impugned Proceedingsof the 3rd Respondent vide} Proc.No.SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC-5/1200'5,^{dated Ogh2l2l19by continuingthe} Petitioner as Assistant Technical^{officer, forthwith pending disposalof the writ} Petition.

¶135

lA NO: 2 OF 2020

¶136

Between:

¶137

The State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,} lrrigation and CADbepartment,-secretariat^{Bqil-dlngs,Hyderabad-500002.}

¶138

ThE Engineer-in-Chief^{(Admn), lrrigation andCAD Department,Jala Soudha,} Enamanzil, Hyderabad-⁵⁰⁰⁰⁸²

¶139

The Superintehding Engineer,^{NSLBC, O and M Circle' Tekulapally,} Khammam-507001

¶140

...PETITIONERS/RESPON^DENTS

¶141

AND

¶142

N.Mnod Chaitanya, S/o Late^{N.G.Srinivas Rao' Age. 41 y9ars,Occ. Assistant} Technical Officdr, O/o. Executive Engineer,^{NSLBC'O and M} -D-ivision, Tekulapally, Khammam, R/o H.No.16-7-19214'^{Sri Gokula Krishna Nilayam'} Madhuia Nagar Colony, Road No.^{10, Gollagudem Road,Rotary Nagar,} Khammam-507002

¶143

...RES'oN,ENT/'ETITI.NER

¶144

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition,the High Court maybe pleasedto} vacate the interim order dated^{09.01.2020in W.P.No.612ol 2O2O.}

¶145

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s.^{K.KIRAN MAYEE} Counset for the Respondents:^{GP FORSERVICES'I/GP FORSERVICES'II}

W.P.NO: 623OF 2020

Between:

Mohd. Nazeemuddin, S/o Nizamuddin, Age. 47 years, Occ. Assistant Technical Officer, O/o Executive Engineer, QC and I Division No.9, Ramagundem, Rl/o H.No. 12-63, Allipur, Raikal Mandal, Jagitial, Karimnagar505460.

¶150

...PETITIONER

¶151

AND

¶152

'l. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,

¶153

. lrrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad-500002

¶154

The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn) lrrigation and CAD Department, Jala Soudha, Erramanzil, Hyderabad- 500082

¶155

The Superintending Engineer, land CAD, IFFC Circle, LMD Colony, Karimnagar -505527

¶156

...RES'.NDENT'

¶157

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an Order, Direction or Writ, more particularly a Writ of Certiorari calling for all the connected records in the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide Proc. No. EstUE 1 /l FFCC/LMD I 201 9-201 2240, dated 1 91 1 21201 I reverting the Petitioner as Junior Technical Officer from Assistant Technical Officer as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law.

¶158

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶159

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the atfidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou( may be pleased to suspend the operation of the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide Proc.No.EstVEl/IFFCC/LMD/2019-2012240, daled 1911212Q19 by continuing the Petitioner as Assistant Technical Officer, forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶160

IAN :2OF 2020

¶161

Between:

¶162

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, lrrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad-500002

¶163

The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn) lrrigation and CAD Department, Jala Soudha, Enamanzil, Hyderabad- 500082

¶164

The Superintending Engineer, I and CAD, IFFC Circle, LMD Colony, Karimnagar -505527

¶165

...RESPONDENTS

¶166

AND

¶167

i,ohd. Nazeemuddin,^{S/o Nizamuddin,Age.} ^41^{years.occ. Assistant} rechnical officer,^{o/o er."'tiii'6-Endlnedr'} -QC^{hnd IDivision No 9'} AZ"^:,1's"r1io#,'tiro^{n.rlo i2:oo' Arrip'i,-n'iui Mandal'Jasitial' Karimnasar-} 505460.

¶168

...PET|T|oNER

¶169

Petition under^{Section 151 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition,the High court may be pleasedto} vabate the interim^{order dated09 01 2020in lA No lot 2O2Oin W'P No 623 of} 2020

¶170

Counsel^{for the Petitioners: M/s K' KIRANMAYEE} - - Counsel for^{the ResponO"ntt'e p FORSERVICES'I/GP FORSERVICES'II}

¶171

w.P.NO :1189^{oF 2020}

¶172

Between:

¶173

A.srinivas^{Reddy, Son of late SrirangaRe9.dV'aSed 45 vears' Occupation'} Assistant Technical^{oinILiI5n-frp cir."rg'xoinqs-udem' KhammamDistrict'} R/o. H.No.^{13-4t16' sJiiiij'Iii' p"ataiinoaGiam Panchavat' Khammam} Rural, Khammam^Dist. ...PETIT|ONER

¶174

...PETIT|ONER

¶175

AND

¶176

The State^{of Telangana, Represented by its Chief Secretary to Government'} ' SecretariatBuildings, Hvderabad'

¶177

2 il;' ilj;i;;;"ii'tfr^{i"r'r"i gliili-ino cAo Department' JalasoudhaBuildins,} Erramaniil,^HYderabad

¶178

Erramaniil,^HYderabad

¶179

1. The Superintending^{Engineer and Proiect Administrator' SRLIIP-I'SRLIP} Circle, i(othagudem,^{Khammamulslncr'}

¶180

...RES'ONDENTS

¶181

Petition under^{Atlicle 226of the Constitution of lndiapraying that in the} circumstances^{stated in the affidavitfiled therewith'the High Court maybe} pleased to issue any^{appropriate Writ' Order or direction' preferably a Writ in the} nature of^{Mandamusdeclaring the action of the Respondents in issuing} Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC.,lF.7t2o1g-2ot46.Mdt.gl1t2o20revertingthe Petitioner^{from the post of Assistant Technical Officer to'the post of Junior} TechnicalofficerintermsofG.o.Ms.No.3llrrigationandCAD(Servicesl) Department^{daled 25tO4t2O18 i'e' Telangana lrrigation EngineeringSubordinate} Service Rules'^{20'18, as illegal, arbitrary andviolative of Articles14 and 16 of the} Constitution of^{lndia by setting aside the reversionProc No'SE/SRLIP-}

¶182

¶183

1/KTDM/EC.5/F.712019-20146-M dt.91112020, and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in the present post by extending all the benefits attached to the post of Assistant Technical Officer.

¶184

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶185

Petition under Section 1 5'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to continue the petitioner in the present post of Assistant Technical Officer with all consequential monetary and other promotional benefits by suspending the impugned orders vide Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-liKTDM/EC.51F.712019-20146-M dt. 9l1l2O2O pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶186

lA NO: 2 OF 2020

¶187

Between:

¶188

The State of Telangana, Represented by its Chief Secretary to G6irernment, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶189

The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶190

The Superintending Engineer and Proiect Administrator, SRLIIP-|, SRLIP Circle, Kothagudem, Khammam District.

¶191

...RESPONDENTS

¶192

AND

¶193

A.Srinivas Reddy, Son of late Sriranga Reddy, aged 45 years, Occupation. Assistant Technical Officer, SRLIP Circle, Kothagudem, Khammam District, Ri/o. H-No. 13-4116, Sainagar ll, Pedda Tanda Giam Panchayat, Khammam Rural, Khammam Dist.

¶194

...PETITIONER

¶195

¶196

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-U GP FOR SERVICES-I|

¶197

¶198

W.P.NO: '1191 OF 2020

¶199

Between:

¶200

D. Thirupathi Rao, S/o Late D. Nagaiah, Aged 44 years, Occ. Assistant Technical Otficer, O/o. The Superintending Engineer and Prolect Administrator, SRLIP-ll, Khammam, Khammam District, Rl/o.H.No. 5-5-1 89/A and 289, Near Roshaiah Hotel, Mustafanagar, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶201

...PETITIONER

¶202

AND

¶203

The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶204

The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶205

The Superintending Engineer and Project Administrator, SRLIP-ll, Khammam, Khammam District

¶206

...REspoNDENTs

¶207

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents. )n issuing Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC.51F.712019-20149-M dt. 9.1.2O2O reverting the Petitioner from the post of Assistant Technical Officer to the post of Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31 lrrigation and CAD (Services l) Department dated 2510412018 i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, 2018, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the reversion Proc.No.SE/SRLIP1/KTDM/EC.5/F.712019-20149-M dt. 9.1.2020, and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in the present post by extending all the benefits attached to the post of Assistant TechniCal Officer.

¶208

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶209

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to continue the petitioner in the present post of Assistant Technical Officer with all consequential monetary and other promotional benefits by suspending the impugned orders vide Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC.slF.7l2O19-20149-M dt. 9.1.2O2O pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

lA NO: 2 OF 2020

Between:

The State of Telangana, represented^{by its Chief Secretaryto Government,} Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad-

¶214

The Engineer-in-Chief, [rrigation and^{CADDepartment, JalasoudhaBuilding,} Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶215

The Supbrint6nding Engineer and^{ProjectAdministrator,SRLIP-Il' Khammam,} Khammam oistrict

¶216

...RE'P.NDENTS

¶217

AND

¶218

D. Thirupathi Rao, S/o Late D. Nagaiah, Aged^{44 yearc,Occ.Assistant} Technicdl Officer, O/o. The Superintending^Engineer and^Project Administrator, SRLIP-Il, Khammam, Khammam^{District,Fl/o.H.No. 5-5-189/A} and 289, Near Roshaiah^{Hotel,Mustafanagar, Khammam,Khammam District}

¶219

...PETITIONER

¶220

Petition under Section 15'l CPC^praying thatⁱⁿ the^{circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the High Court may be pleasedto} vacate the interim orders daled 23-01-2O20^{in lA.No.1of 2020 in W.P. No.1191 of} 2020.

¶221

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SHAIK MADAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP^{FOR SERVICES-U GP FOR SERVICES-Il}

¶222

W.P.NO: 1215 OF 2020

¶223

Between:

¶224

K.Srinivas Rao, Son of Sri K.Andhraiah, Aged^{48 years, Occupation.Assistant} Technical Officer, O/o. The Executive Engineer,^{SRLIPDivisionNo.2,} Bhadradri-Kothagudem, Khammani District,^{R/o.H.No.10-6-1817,} Mamellagudem, Khammam, Khammam District.

¶225

...'ET.TIONER

¶226

AND

¶227

The State of Telangana, represented^{by its Chief} Secretary^{to Govemment,} Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶228

The Engineer-in-Chief, irrigation and^{CADDepartmenl, JalasoudhaBuilding,} Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶229

The Supbrint6nding Engineer, and^{Project Administrator,.SRLIP-1,SRLIP} Circte, Kothagudem, Khammam District.

¶230

The Executive Engineer, SRLIP DIVISION^{No.2, Kothagudem,}

¶231

...RESPONDENTS

¶232

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

¶233

tft

¶234

pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC .1tF.7 t2O1g-2O144-M dt.^{gt1t2O2O revertingthe} Petitioner from the post of Assistant Technical Officer to the^post of Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31 lrrigation and CAD (Services l) Department dated 251041201 I i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, 20'18, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and^'16 of the Constitution of India by setting aside the reversion Proc.No.SE/SRLIPIiKTDM/EC.5/F.712019-20144-M dt. 911l2O2O, and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in the present post by extending all the benefits attached to the post of Assistant Technical Officer.

¶235

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶236

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be. pleased to continue the petitioner in the present post of Assistant Technical Officer with all consequential monetary and other promotional benefits by suspending the impugned orders vide Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC.slF.7l2O19-2O144-M dt. 91112020 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶237

lA NO: 2 OF 2020

¶238

Between:

¶239

The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶240

The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

¶241

The Superintending Engineer, and Project Administrator, SRLIP-|, SRLIP Circle, Kothagudem, Khammarn District.

¶242

The Executive Engineer, SRLIP DIVISION No.2, Kothagudem,

¶243

AND

¶244

....RESPONDENTS

¶245

K.Srinivas Rao, Son of Sri K.Andhraiah, Aged 48^years, Occupation. Assistant Technical Officer, O/o. The Executive Engineer, SRLIP Division No.2, Bhadradri-Kothagudem, Khammam Diskict, Rl/o.H.No. 10-6-18n, Mamellagudem, Khammam, Khammam District.

...,ET,T,ONER

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-I/ cp FOR SERVTCES-[

¶250

W.P.NO: 5333 OF 2020

¶251

Between:

¶252

Chanda Satyanarayana, S/o. Venkanna, aqed 57 vears. Occ.Govt. Emolovee Rl/o. O/o. The Executive Engineer, eC and-l Divisi6n No.7, Karim Naga'r '

...PET|T|ONER

AND

1. Ihe State of Telangana, Eqp, Uy its Principal Secretary, lrrigation and CAD -^{Department,Secretariat BuiidinO,Hydera6ad-500002,} 2. The Engineer-ln-Chief (Admn), Irrigation and CAD Department, Jala Soudha, Erramanzil, Hyderabad-500082,

¶257

3 The Superintendent Engineer, land CAD, J.C.R.D.L.l.S. Circle, K.b.Colony,

¶258

_^{Chinthagattu, Hanamkohda, Warangal-506001,}

¶259

1. The Exebutive Engineer, Quality Co-nkol and lnspection, Division No.7 Karim Nagar, 5O50O l.^-

¶260

...RESPONDENTS

¶261

Petition under Articte 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, Direction or writ, more particularly a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly the action of 3rd Respondent issuing impugned proceedings Order dated 29tOZlO20 vide Proceedings No. sE/JCRDLtS/cA&GUES/A2t2o1gt201361ts reviewing petitioners promotions without having power to review after lapse of nearly ten years by deliberately neglecting to examine suitability of the petitioners qualifiation i.e., Draughtsman civil for promotion and reverting the petitioner from the cadre of Assistant Technical officer to lower cadre of Junior Technical officer as illegal, arbitrary, without authority and against the provisions of law ani also against the principles of naturaljustice and consequently set aside the impugned order dated 2gto2t2o2o vide Proceedings No. sE/JCR Dlls/cAflcuEst9t2o1gt2ot361ts passed by the 3rd Respondent.

¶262

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶263

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that^{in the circumstancessteted in} the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleasedto suspend the operation of impugned Proceedings^passed by 3rd Respondent^Vide file No. SE/JCR DLISiCMGUESlA212019-201361/S dated^2910212020 by^alowing the Petitioner to continue in his original cadre of Assistant Technical^Officer (Draughtsman Grade-ll) pending disposal of the above Writ petition.

¶264

lA NO: 2 OF 2020

¶265

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleasedto extend the interim order daled 1110312020^passed in W.P.No. 5333 of 2020 on the file of this Honourable Court.

¶266

lA NO: 3 OF 2020

¶267

¶268

Petition under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court^may be^pleased to^direct the respondents more particularly the 4th respondent herein to^grant and release Petitioner's annual grade increment forthwith which is due on 01-03-2020^pending disposal of WP.No. 5333 of 2020 also allow all monetary benefits^{for which} the petitioner is entitled to during his service.

¶269

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BHANU MURTHY BALA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-U GP^FOR SERVICES'II

¶270

W.P.NO: 6325OF 2O2O

¶271

Between:

¶272

K.Kavi Raja Rao, S/o. K.Raleshwar Rao, Aged about 52^{yegrs,_ Occ.} Technical Officer, O/o. Executive Engineer, Division No.1-CCH,^{KC Camp,} Hanamkonda, Rl/o. H.No.22-2-55, Deshapet, Near Gpvt^{High School,} warangal-506 oo6

¶273

...PETrroNER

¶274

AND

¶275

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary^{to Government,} lnigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings,^{Hyderabad-500002.}

¶276

The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn), lnigation and CAD^{Department,Jala Soudha,} Erramanzil, Hyderabad- 500082

¶277

¶278

The Superintending Engineer, I and CADD, Construction Circle, Hanamkonda.

¶279

...RESPONDENTS

¶280

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an Order, Direction or Writ, more particularly a Writ of Certiorari calling for all the connected records in the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide Proc. No.SE/CCHES/E3/2020, dated 30.01.2020 wherein the Petitioners date of promotion as Technical Officer has been revised and the consequential Proceedings of the 2nd Respondent vide Proc.No.EE/DlVN1 /CCH/HNK/EC1 l2O2OlEC1 1172, daled 2510212020 wherein the Petitioners pay has been reduced as illegal, improper, uniust, arbitrary and contrary to law.

¶281

lA NO:^'f OF 2020

¶282

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may ba pleased to suspend the operation of the impugned Proceedings in Proc No.SE/CCH|ES|E3|2O20, dated .3Ol01l2O2O, Proc. No. EE/D IVN 1 /CCH/HNKJE C1 I 2020 I EC1 I 1 7 2, dated 25 lO2l 2020 of the 3rd Respondent and the 2nd Respondent respectively by continuing to pay the Petitioner his earlier scale of pay, forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶283

Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s K.KIRAN MAYEE Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES ll

¶284

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶285

¶286

a.' C

¶287

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{NAGESHBIIEEMAPAKA}

¶288

WRIT PETITIO Ns No. 10 172 O^F 2014.^{255sO,27950, 27973 AJ|ID 279A4} oF 2019, 6L2. 623, ll 89. 1r91.^{l2 rs,s333AND6325oF 2020}

¶289

coMMON ORDER:

¶290

Since the lis involved^{in all theseWrit Petitionsls} one and the same,^{they are heard together and disposedof by} this common^order.

¶291

For convenience^{sake, the facts narrated in Writ} Petition No. 25550^{of 2Ol9 are takenup for consideration'}

¶292

Proceedings of^{the 3'd respondent} -^{Rarnit'i"tt"tot-} cum-Chief Engineer^{date d O6 l |} '2019^{reverting petitioneras} Assistant Technical^{Officerlrom the post of Technical Officerare} challenged in^{this Writ Petition.}

¶293

The facts which^{are germanefor considerationare:} Petitioner is stated^{to have been appointed as Tracer/Technical} Assistant in^{20O5 based on ITI DM Civil qualihcationand} subsequently,^{was promoted up to the post of Junior Technical} Ofhcer in 2007,^{Assistant Technical Ofhcer in2009 and} Technical Ofhcer^{in 2014.While so, the 2"d respondent -} Engineer-in-Chief^{(Admn-),Irrigation and CAD Department} issued Circular^{Memo dated24 'O7 '2017 to the effect that}

¶294

¶295

promotions given to Technical Assistants without insisting for qualif-rcation prescribed for the post uide Government Memos dated O1.Ol.2OO8 and 06.08.2016 is against Rules, hence, cancelled thc promotions issued earlier and reverted all such individuals to the post of Technical Assistant after a lapse of ten years and lurther promotion orders were cancelled r,r.ith im mediate e Ifect. Aggrieved by the said Circular Memo dated 24.O7.2017, a group of individuals hled Writ Petition No. 30249 of 2Ol7 wherein this Court granted interim sltspensron on I I .09.20 17 of the Circular Memo and the respective Reversion orders and the said interim order was extended until further orders on 16.lO.2Ol7.

¶296

While the matter stood thus, the 3'd respondent issued noticc in memo dated, 07.O2.2018 calling f<rr objections; aggrieved bv which and the Circular Memo dated 24.07.2017, petitioner approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 10172 of 2O18. This Court by order dated O2.O4.2O1a granted interim suspension for two weeks. Subsequently, petitioner is stated to have submitted explanation to the notice dated 07.02.2018 on 05.09.2019 and 02.11.2Ol9 stating that as per Rules in vogue, his promot ion liom the post of Technical Assistant was as per G.O.Ms.No. 2466, dated 06.09.1956 and Me mo dated

¶297

f3.O5.1967 and requested the 3'd respondent to consider his case and rescind the proposed reversion orders. However, without taking the same into consideration and the^judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which held reversion after a long period of time bad, passed the impugned order dated 06.11.2019 reverting him to the post of Assistant Technical Officer.

¶298

Meanwhile, the 1"t respondent issued special Rules in the form of Telangana Irrigation Engineering Subordi.qate Service Rules, 2018 uide G.O.Ms.No. 31, dated 25.04.2O18 with prospective effect. Challenging the said G.O., petitioner along with others filed Writ Petition No. 32503 of 2O18 and the same is pending adjudication. It is stated, in view of the interim suspension of Circular Memo dated 24.O7.2017 in Writ Petition No. 30249 of 2017, petitioner was continuing in the post as Technical Officer until the impugned proceedings were passed and now the 3'd respondent cannot take shelter of a suspended memo and issue the impugned proceedings.

¶299

Petitioner states that G.O.Ms.No. 2466, dated 06.09.1956 clearly recognizes a pass in draughtsmanship^(civil) course under the revised syllabus introduced from July 1952 as sufficient qualihcation for appointment as Draughtsman II

¶300

¶301

(.lunior Technical Officer), Draughtsman III (Assistant Technical Officer) when LCtr zrre not available and the said G.O. was further clarilled uide Memo dated 13.05.1967. Circular Memo daLed 24 .O7 .2O 17 rcfers lo a clarification issued by Lhe Government in Memo dated O 1 .O 1 .2008 wherein Technical Assistant (Traccrs) who put in not less than ten years experience rn the cadre of Tracer can be promoted to the cate€lorv of .Iunior Technical Officer (DM GT.III) without insisling for qualilications for tlre post. In view of the same and also in view of subsistence of G.O.Ms.No . 2466, aated OO.OS.1SSO, impugned ordcr is liable to the set aside. According to pt:titioncr, insistencc lor ten years of service in the said Memo derted O I .O 1.2()08 applies only to those who do not have the requisitc qr-rzr li fic:zrtion for promotion to Junior Technical Officer and it docs not apply to them as ITI DM(Civii) has been recognized as sufflcient qualification as per G.O.Ms.No. 2466.

¶302

Thc contention of petitioner is that in Roads and Brrildings and Panchayat Raj Departments, Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, ITI DM (Civil) qualification is in<:luded against the posts of Junior Technical Officer, Assistant Ter:hnical Ofllccr, Te<:hnical Ofhcer and only three years of

¶303

¶304

service is prescribed for^promotion to^{JTO from the cadre of} Technical Assistant

¶305

This Court, while issuing rule nisi,^{by order dated} 20.12.2019, suspended the impugned^{reversion order dated} 06. 11.2019 as the said^{proceedings,if given effect to, petitioner} would be reverted by two stages which^{amounts to double} rcverslon

¶306

The 3'd respondent filed counter stating^that petitioner was appointed as Technical Assistant^{on 07.04.2005} on displaced persons quota^with SSC,^{ITI DM Civil qualification;} further promoted as JTO^(DM III)^{without completingrequired} service of ten years on 13.O9.2OO7; as^{DM II(Assistant} Technical Ofhcer) on 18.08.2009 and^{subsequently,as DM I} (Technical Officer) ot 29.11.2014 by the^{3'd respondent. As per} the Circular dated 24.O7.2017, the^{said promotions are} irregular, hence, it was informed that^{as per APESS Rules,} Government Circular Memo dated^{O I .O I .2008 and Government} Memo dated 06.08.2016, the^{TechnicalAssistant who put in not} less than ten years of experience^{in the cadreof Tracer can be} promoted to the category of JTO^{without insistingfor} qualification prescribed for the said^{post. Further, the2ncr} respondent issued instructions^{regarding promotionfrom}

¶307

¶308

Tcchnical Assistant to JTO, JTO and ATO and TO^whowere promoted fnrm Technrcal Assistant to JTO and further promoted to the post of ATO/TO without acquiring requisite^{qualification} /^{serviceas per Rules by revisingthe date of promotion. It is} made clear that as per Rule, Technical Assislant with ITI qualification has to be promoted to the post of JTO after completion of ten yczrrs of service as Technical Assistant and with the qualilication of Diploma after completion of three years. In this rr:gard, this olflce issued notice to petitioner dated 07.O2.2018, but the latter did not submit any objections Therefore, another memo dated 29.O3.2OI8 was issued

¶309

The 2nct respondent conducted meeting on 24.lO.2Ol9 and issued instructions to the effect that Technical Assistants $ho put in not less than ten years of experience in the said cadre czrn be promoted to the cadre of JTO wilhout insisting for qualifications prescribed and who completed the minimum service prescribed in State and Subordinate Service Rules can also be promoted to the said post without insisting for ten years experiencc. Following the same, the 3'd respondent reverted pctitioncr from TO to ATO.

¶310

7 l,earnt:d counseI for petitioner Ms. Kiranmayee submits that thc Hon'ble APAT ip a batch of Originat

¶311

¶312

Applications i.e. O.A.No. 6425 of^{1995, categorically held that} ITI is one of the qualifications^{prescribedfor the post of Civil} Draughtsman Gr.lll (Jr. TO); as no separate^{qualihcation is} prescribed for Gr.ll or Gr.I DM (now, ATO &^TO), it^{follows that} DM Gr.lll with qualihcation of ITI can^{go right} up to^{DM Gr.I} (TO) without having to posses any further or^special qualification. The said^judgment was conhrmed^by a^Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 15525^{of 2022 on which} no Special Leave Petition was^preferred by^{the State, therefore,} the^judgment of the Tribunal attained finality.^{Accordin! to} learned counsel, in the light of the A.P.^{EngineeringSubordinate} Service Rulcs, 1953, GO.Ms.No. 2466,^{dated O6.09.1956 and} the^judgment of the Hon'ble APAT^{in O.A.No.6425 of 1995 and} batch, ITI (Civil) is the requisite^{qualihcationfor the posts of} JTO, ATO and TO, therefore, the^{impugrredorder is liable to be} set aside. She contends that^minimum Qualifying^{service of ten} years or possessing Diploma in Civil /^{Electrical/ Mech.} trngineering that respondents have^{contendedto be compulsory} for promotion to the post of JTO^{from Technical Assistant are} not aplicable to a person who possesses ITI^{(civil), as stated} supra.

Learned counsel contends^{that the settled seniority} cannot be unsettled^{at this lengthof time ln this context, she} places rcliance on thc^{judgmentof the Hon'ble SupremeCourt} in G.S.La n-ba u.^{(Jnion oJ Indial.She also relied on the} judgment of thc Hon'ble Apex Court^{in RolmSarupu' State of}

¶317

Haryana2, KushesuLrarrtath^{Pandeg v. State of Blhanr} '^H'C' Puttasuamg u.^{Hon'ble Chief Justice ofKarz.otaka High} Court, Bangalor*,^{BagauathiPrasad a' DelhiState} Mineral Deoelopment^{Corporations.According tolearned} counsel, all the^{rn-rpugned proceedingsare consequintial} proceedings o[ Circulzrr^{Me mo dated24.07} '2017^whichwas suspended bv this^{Court in Writ PetitionNo. 30249of 2017 uide} order datecl¹¹ .O9.2017 ,^{therefore, reversion proceedings would} be illegal and u'ould^{l-r()t have anylegs to stand'}

¶318

Per conlra, learned^{GovernmentPleaders for} Scrvices - I and II,^{reiteratingthe avermentsin the counter,} submit that^{tmpugrleclreversion order waspassed in} accordance^rvith thc^{servicerules,hence,no exception canbe} taken to the same.^{The Writ Petition is therefore, liableto be} dismissed. They^{reliedon the judgment of the DivisionBench of}

¶319

' 1^{ros3fzTctoo.r}

¶320

'^{AIRl97E s(' l: 16}

¶321

'20ri(to)^sCAl-t.217 o AtR l99t sc lsi t nlR lgqo s( ir l

¶322

¶323

this Court in A.P.S.R.?.C. u. M. Venkatesuar Reddg1 wherein it was held that for promotion to the post of Divisional Manager, three years service as Deputy Manager is one of the essential qualihcations and Selection Committee cannot ignore this and appoint candidates who do not possess^prescribed service. They also relied on the^judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Fuljit Kaur u. Sta'te of PunjabT and Rashi Manl Mishra v. State of U.P.8

¶324

Having heard learned counsel on either side^gnd having perused the material on record, it is evident, principal contention of petitioner is that requisite qualifrcation / service as required by respondents through the impugned^order is^not necessary for promotion from Technical Assistalt to next higher posts, whereas respondents contend that petitioner was promoted without possessing Diploma in Civil/ Mech Engineering. From the post of Technical Assistant to JTO, hence, he is required to put up ten years of service, however, as he did not comply with the said norm, his subsequent promotions also does not hold good.

¶325

"^{2ooi(4) ALD 20r (DB)}

¶326

' (2010) ll scc 455

¶327

t (:02 r) rz scc tgs

¶328

¶329

In this lactual backdrop, it is to be noted that A.P. Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, 1953 (Madras Engineering Suborclinale Service Rules) govern the service conditions. Rule 2(4) prescribes the criteria for appointment / promotion to the post of TO, JTO, ATO (earlier Draughtsman Gr. I, II and III). Rule 2(6) prescribes the criteria for appointment / promotion lr) the post of Te chnical Assistant (earlier Tracer). Schedule Referred to in Rule 6 prescribes the qualification required to the post ol TO, ATO, JTO and Tracer. The Proviso also states that qualification specified shall not be necessary for appointment as Civil Draughtsman Gr.lll in case of Tracers with not less than ten -vears experience as Tracers. G.O.Ms.No. 2466, datcd 06.09.1956 was issued recognizing a pass in Draughtsm:rn ship course as sufficicnt for appointment to the post of Dr.Gr.lll (now JTO).The said G.O. was further clarihed in Memo dated 13.05.1967 to the effect that candidates who passed DM(Civil) Course of thc revised syllabus introduced in July, 1952 can be appointed if diploma holders are not available and this docs not aclmit of the interpretation that such of those appointed should bt: ousted as and n,hen diploma holclers become available.^'1'he Elovernment further direct that as in the case supra, who evt:r serviccs are regularised after appointment, despite the fact that degrcc holders become available at later

¶330

¶331

date, the services of candidates^{possessingthe DM (Civil)} qualification of the revised syllabus^{introduced from July,1952} should also be regulansed^{despite the fact that LCE holders} become available at later^{date. Further, Circular Memo dated} 24.O7 .2017 also refers to a clarification^issuedbythe Government in Memo dated^{O 1 .01 .2008 whereinTechnical} Assistant^(Tracer) who^{put in not less than ten yearsexperience} in the cadre of Tracer, can^{be promoted to the categoryof JTO} without insisting for qualifications^{prescribed therefor.}

¶332

1 l. Further, the Hon'ble APAT in^{O.A.No.6425 of 1995} and batch, categorically^{held that ITI is one of the qualihcations} prescribed for the post of Civil^{Dr.Gr.III (nowJTO). The said} judgment also categorically held that as no separate qualilication is prescribed lor Gr.II or^{Gr.l DM (now ATO &TO), it} follows that a DM Gr.lll^with a^{qualihcationof ITI can go right} up to DM Gr.l^(now TO)^{without having to possessany further} or special qualification.^{The said judgment was conhrmedby the} Division Bench of this Court^{in Writ Petition No. 15525 of 2OO2} and no SLP was^preferred by^{the State thereagainst which} means the^judgment of^{the Tribunalattainedlinality' Here, it is} also to be seen that Circular^{Memoissuedby the 2"d respondent} d,ated. 24.07.2O17^{cancellingthe promotions given to Technical}

¶333

{

¶334

¶335

Assistants without insisting^{for qualifications prescribed for the} post uide Government Memo dated^{O 1.O l -2008 and} Government Mcmo dated^{06.08.20 16 isagainstrulesand} reverting all such individuals,^{was challenged in Writ Petition} No. 30249 of 20167^{w-hereinthe order of interimsuspension} was granted until further orders.^{However, respondentswithout} taking steps to vacate^{the interim order, passedthe impugned} order dated 06r.l1.20lg^{reverting petitioncr lrom tht: post o[ TO} to ATO. Moreover, Telangana^{Irrigation Engincering Subordinate} Service Rules. 20la issued uide^{G.O.Ms.No. 31,a^tea} 25.O4 .2O18 u'hich prescribes^{eligibility criteria, was challenged} in Writ Petitior.r No. 32503 of^{2O 18 and the same is pending} adjudication. Normally, an Ofhce^Memorandum /^Government Order cannot have a^{retrospective effectunlessand until there} is an express provision to^{makeits effect rctrospective or [hat} the operation thereof is retrospective^{by necessarf implication.} Admittedly, G.().Ms.No.31 was^{giveneffect to from the date of} its publication in the Ofhcial^{Gazette, hcnce, itcannothave} retrospective effect on the^{promotions affected earlier thereto.} Here, it is also to be observed that^{inview of the interim} suspension of Circular Memo dated 24.O7.2017^{in Writ Petition} No. 30249 ol 2017 , petitioner was continuing in^{the post of} Technical Offic:er until the impugned proceedings were^passed

¶336

¶337

and now the 3rd^{respondent cannot take shelter of a suspended} memo and issue the^{impugnedproceedings.In this view of the} matter, this Court cannot^{find favour with the contentions of} learned Government Pleaders.

¶338

Coming to legal pronouncements, ln Kusheswdrnath Pandeg's^{c@se(supra), the Honble Supreme} Court held that employee's^{promotion cannotbe cancelled after} a long tenure such as that of^{11 years. In Rcm Sarup'scase} (supra), the Apex Court^{while dealing with the legalityof- an} order of reversion of^{promotion forlacking minimum} qualihcations at the time of^{employment, held the same as} i1legal. ln H.C.Puttaswa^{ntg's case} ,^{the Hon'ble Apex Court} held that employees who^{have served for over ten years ald} have received higher posts^{by working hard during service, their} services cannot be dismissed^{for lack of qualificationsat such} belated stage. InB uathi Pra.so,d's ccse.^{the Hon'ble} Supreme Court held that^{lack o[ qualihcation at the time of} appointment must not^{be factored as a ground for prohibiting} promotion. It is also established^{position that settled seniority} cannot be unsettled at^{this length of time. In view of the above,} it can be said that reversions^{after such a long time especially}

¶339

¶340

¶341

when petitione r's servlce was regularised in each cadre is unsustainable.

¶342

In the light of the discussion held supra, this Court is of the opinion that the case of respondents does not stand to scrutiny. In vieu, of the conclusion arrived at by this Court, the judgments rclied on by learned Government Pleaders arc not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case, hence, they are not taken into consideration.

¶343

t4 Writ Petition No- 2555O of 2019 is accordingly, allowed, setting aside the proceedings o[ the 3.1 respondent dated O6.11,2019. No costs

¶344

WRIT PETITIONS No. lOl72 of 2OL8 27950 27973 27944 of 2019,612, 623, llag, 1191, 1215, 5333 and 6325 of 2020

¶345

Ileard Ms, K. Kiranmayee, .Sri T. Surlhakar Redcly, Sri Shaik Madar, Sri Bhanu Murthy Bala, learnecl counsel for petitioners and learned Government Plead'ers for Serviccs I and II.

¶346

F or the rezrsons stated in Writ Petition No. 2555O of 2O 19, all thesc Writ Petitions are also allowed, duh, setting aside the orders impugned- No costs. i--

¶347

¶348

t7. Consequently, the misce flaneous Applications, if

¶349

any shall stand closed.

¶350

That Rule Nisi^{hasbeen made absolute as above'}

¶351

Witness THE HON'BLE^{THE CHIEFJUSTICE ALOK ARADHE'on this FBI94Y'} iiii rwrlrw^{eTGHTH DAY oF FEBRUARYTwo rHousANDAND TwENwFlvE}

¶352

Sd/. MOHD.^ISMAIL ASSISTAN REGTSTRAR

¶353

//TRUE COPY//

¶354

SE N OFFICER

¶355

To 1. The Principal Secretary to Government, lrrigation and CAD Department' ' i;il;;J5;;r-etaiiitinvoerauad, State oir-elansana - 500 022'

¶356

z ifili'ii,ljiiirEi-irrcni"i'tA6r"ir"igition^{andcAD,-Department Jala soudha,} Erramaizil, Hyderabad^{- 500 082'}

¶357

i#ffiffiidtrli;i;u;^{cniei insineer,sRSP, LMD.colonv' Karimnasar'} ;. iil ehi;i $tiiirrv^{to cori..tni s'"iretariat Buildinss,-Hyderabad, State} of Telanoana.

¶358

5 ii,;H;"";i;i;ndins^{Ensineer, NSLBC, o and M Circle' Tekulapallvq''}

¶359

Khamril,arn, Khammam^District'

¶360

o iiiE'Eilii,ilvi^{Ensinier, NSLBC,o and M Division' Kalluru'Khammam} District.

¶361

Z fn"e'Srp"tintending^{Engineer'I and CAD, IFFCCircle' LMDColony'} Karimnaoar -505527

¶362

a, iilj'H,liE",i"tJiiin-g^{Engine"r and proiecrAdministraror,sRLllP-|,SRLIP} - Circle, kothagudem, Khammam District' f. iti;'5ii;;iBniing'engineetlnd^{ProjectAdministrator'sRLIP-ll'Khammam'} Khammam District

¶363

I o. iiiE'EiLi,jtrJEnsine"r.,^{sRLIP DlvlsloN No 2' Kothloudem'} 11.The superintendent^{engintei,r ,-',i,i cAD, J C -c.Or.t.sl circle, K.c.colony,} Cnintnigattu,^{Hanamko-nda,Warangal-506001'}

¶364

rz.inJ'eie-cu-tlG^{Engineer,o,irritvco"niioj and lnspection, Division No.7 Karim} Naoar. 505001.

¶365

1 3 iiiZtC iJ tr,tts.^{K.v. RAJASRE E, Advocate} tgry.ql, 1 4 5n; cc i6 iviii.^{k.rtanuMAYEE,Advocate toPUCl-} -- 1 5 ffi dd i;5ir]^{i.sUrjHexanneooY, Adv^oaateIoPUcl} 1 6 5; cc io Sni sHntr^{MADAR,Advocate toPucl} -- -..^ 1 il; dd 6 Siii^{BHANU MaRTHYBALA,Advoc.ate.[oP^UC].} - . 1 7I i;; dd.'i"-cilcin^{SEnvrces_r, Hisn courtfor the State of Telansana, at} Hvderabad. [OUT]

¶366