ONE MAN COMMISSION - Girglani Report (Vol-2)
జూన్ 14th, 2007 by డిస్కవర్ తెలంగాణ
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
ONE MAN COMMISSION
(SIX POINT FORMULA)
J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.)
FINAL REPORT
IN THREE VOLUMES
ON
IMPLEMENTATION OF PRESIDENTIAL ORDER
ON PUBLIC SERVICES, 1975
AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF G.O.Ms.No.610,
G.A.( SPF.A) DEPT., DATED 30-12-1985.
VOLUME – II
APPENDICES, ANNEXURES AND PROCEEDINGS
UP TO 22nd SEPTEMBER 2004.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SPF) DEPARTMENT
FINAL REPORT
VOLUME – II
APPENDICES 5-25 Pages
ANNEXURES 26-84 Pages
PROCEEDINGS 85-243 Pages
APPENDICES
INDEX
No - Appendix - Page Nos.
I G.O.Ms.No.610, G.A(SPF-A) Dept.,Dt.30.12.1985 5-7
II G.O.Ms.No.270,G.A(SPF-A) Dept., Dt.25.06.2001 8-9
III G.O.Ms.No.327,G.A(SPF-A) Dept., Dt.22.07.2002 10
IV G.O.Rt.No.2755,G.A(SPF-A) Dept.,Dt.17.06.2003 11-12
V Statistics on Transfers 13
VI One Man Commission Letter No.06/86/OMC(A1)/
2002-1, Dt.01.11.2002 addressed to
Secretary (Services), G.A.D. 14-17
VII Note from Secretary (Services),G.A.D addressed
to Chairman, Anomalies Commission 18
VIII One Man Commission D.O.Lr.No.6169/OMC/A/
2001, Dt.26.10.2002 addressed to
Secretary (Services), G.A.D. 19-22
IX Government of India, Gazette No.902, New Delhi,
Dt.13.12.2001 23-24
X Statistics on Compassionate Appointments 25
XI Statistics on pending Applications for
Compassionate Appointments 25
XII Statistics on 10 (a) (i) Appointments 25
XII-A Statistics on Deputations 25
XII-B Statistics on ‘State Level Institutions’ 25
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
ABSTRACT
SIX POINT FORMULA – Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres & Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 – Alleged violation in the implementation of Six Point Formula in Zones V to VI – Rectification – Order – Issued.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SPF-A) DEPARTMENT
G.O.Ms.No.610 Dated the 30-12-1985
Read the following
1. G.O.Ms.No.674, G. A. (SPF-A) Dept., dated 20-10-1975.
2. G.O.P.No.728, G. A. (SPF-A) Dept., dated 01-11-1975.
3. G.O.P.No.729, G. A. (SPF-A) Dept., dated 01-11-1975.
4. From the President, Telangana Non-Gazetted Officers Union,
letter dated 05-12-1985
* * *
O R D E R:
The G.O. 1st read above, which is generally known as Presidential Order contains principles regarding Organisation of Local Cadres allotment of personnel of the various Departments to the various local cadres, method of direct recruitment to the various categories, inter-local cadre in transfers etc. of the employees holding those posts. In the G.Os 2nd and 3rd read above clarificatory instructions were issued regarding procedure for implementation of the various provisions of the Presidential Order.
2. In accordance with the provisions of the Presidential Order, local cadres have been organized to the various categories of posts in all Government Departments and allotment of personnel was made as per the guidelines contained in paragraph 4 of the said order.
3. In the representation 4th cited, the President, Telangana Non-Gazetted Officers Union has represented that certain allotments have been made in violation of the provisions of the Presidential Order.
4. The Government after carefully examining the issues raised in the representation and after having wide ranging discussion with the representatives of the Union have entered into an agreement with the Telangana Non-Gazetted Officers Union on 07-12-1985.
5. As per the terms of agreement the following orders are issued:
(1) The employees allotted after 18-10-1975 to Zones V & VI in violation of zonalisation of local cadres under the Six Point Formula will be repatriated to their respective zones by 31-03-1986 by creating supernumerary posts wherever necessary.
(2) In respect of Jurala, Srisailam Left Canal and Sriramsagar Project Stage -II, all the staff in the Non-Gazetted categories both technical and non-technical including Asst. Executive Engineers (formerly JEs) coming under zonalisation of local cadres under the Presidential Order of 1975 who were posted to the projects from outside zones V and VI after 01-03-1983, will be retransferred to their respective zones and posted either in existing vacancies in various Government Establishments in those zones or in supernumerary posts where vacancies are not available. Towards this the Government will also move the Government of India for seeking amendment to Government of India’s notification G.S.R. 525(E) dated 28-06-1985 to give retrospective effect to this order with effect from 01-03-1983.
(3) (a) In respect of appeals filed against orders of allotment made under paragraph 4 of the Presidential Order of 1975 to the competent authority in time and where such appeals are still pending disposal, all such cases where details are furnished by the T.N.G.Os Union or individuals, shall be disposed of by 31-03-1986.
(b) As a result of the above exercise, consequential vacancies if any, arising shall be filled up as per the procedure laid down under the Presidential Order.
(4) In respect of first level Gazetted posts in certain Departments which are outside the purview of the Presidential Order, action should be taken to review the question of inclusion of such posts also in the scheme of localization and the matter should be taken up with the Government of India for suitable amendment to the said order.
(5) The posts in Institutions/Establishment notified in G.S.R. No.526 (E) dated:18-10-1975 shall be filled up by drawing persons on tenure basis from different local cadres on an equitable basis as per the orders issued in the G.O. 3rd read above.
(6) The provision in Para 5(2) (c) of the Presidential Order relating to inter-local cadre transfers shall be strictly implemented and such transfers shall be effected only under exceptional circumstances in public interest.
(7) Action will be initiated in the concerned departments in cases brought to their notice regarding bogus registrations in Employment Exchanges.
(8) On receipt of complaints, if any, made by the TNGOs Union relating to irregular allotments of candidates particularly to Zones V and VI in the category of Village Assistants the concerned department shall take up the matter with the A.P. Public Service Commission and take such measures as may be necessary to rectify the irregular allotments made if any.
(9) The possibility of allotting persons from within the same zone/multi-zone against non-local vacancy in a particular local cadre will be examined in consultation with the APPSC.
(10) The T.N.G.Os Union will furnish to Government the service/ categories where for want of trained personnel, non-local candidates are being appointed in zones V and VI so that Government can provide training facilities in respect of such services/categories with a view to providing adequate opportunities for recruitment and appointment of local candidates in zones V and VI.
(11) The Departments of Secretariat shall complete the review of appointments/ promotions made under the Presidential Order as required under Para 13 of the said order, by 30-06-1986.
(12) (a) Immediate action will be taken to finalise the Common Gradation List in respect of Assistant Engineers (Presently Dy. E.Es) as on 01-11-1956, following the prescribed procedure under the S.R. Act. 1956.
(b) In respect of former Junior Engineers (Presently Asst.E.Es) the common gradation list published by the Government was quashed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal and the Government had gone in appeal to the Supreme Court. Effective measures will be taken for the disposal of the matter before the Supreme Court, expeditiously.
(13) The matter relating to allotment of 7 non-local personnel in the cadre of Inspector of Local Fund Audit belonging to Zones I to IV, allotted to Zones-V and VI against their options, will be examined by the Department concerned keeping in view of the provisions of the Presidential Order.
(14) The question of repatriation of 13 Deputy Executive Engineers of the Public Health Department working in the city of Hyderabad to Zones I to IV will be considered by the Department concerned keeping in view the provisions of the Presidential Order.
6. The Departments of Secretariat who are concerned with the terms shall take immediate necessary steps to implement the orders in consultation with Law/General Administration Department, if necessary, about the legal implications/interpretation of the provisions of the Presidential Order.
(BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH)
SHRAVAN KUMAR
CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
To
All Secretaries to Govt.
All Departments of Secretariat
//TRUE COPY//
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER.
* * *
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
ABSTRACT
ESTABLISHMENT – Six Point Formula – A.P. Public Employment (OLC & RDR) Order, 1975 – Implementations of G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-A) Department dated 30-12-1985 – One Man Commission with Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS (Retd) – Constituted – Orders – Issued.
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SPF-A) DEPARTMENT
G.O.Ms.No.270 Dated the 25th June, 2001
Read :-
G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-A) Department,
Dated 30-12-1985.
* * *
O R D E R:
Government have been receiving certain representations regarding rectification of lapses in the implementation of Six Point Formula, in so far it relates to the Public Services. After all Party Meeting held on 15-6-2001 and after careful consideration, the Government hereby constitute a One Man Commission with Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS., (Retd).
2. The Commission will receive representations from Association / individuals where the injustice is done in the implementation of G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-A) Department, dated 30-12-1985 and to sort out the anomalies. The Commission shall submit its report within 90 days.
3. The Commission will also take up further follow up action for the rectification of defects, anomalies and irregularities, if any, and arrive at estimates of deviation and anomalies from the Presidential Order, and also suggest remedial actions which would include a mechanism to ensure implementation and monitoring of Six Point Formula, during the subsequent period of its term.
4. The term of the Commission will be for a period of one year. Separate Orders shall be issued regarding the terms and conditions of the One Man Commission.
5. The Commission shall be provided with such staff and Secretarial assistance as may be necessary for the proper discharge of its duties and responsibilities.
6. All Departments of Secretariat shall provide the required information and material to the Commission.
7. The expenditure on the One Man Commission shall be debitable to the Head of Account “2052 – Secretariat General Services - (090) Secretariat – (04) – G.A.D. – (010) – Salaries”.
8. This order issues with the concurrence of Finance Department vide their U.O. No.4230/FS(R&E)/2001, dated 25-6-2001.
(BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH)
P.V.RAO
CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
To
Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS., (Retd)
H.No. 7-1-69/2
(New 640) Dharamkaram Road, Ameerpet, Hyderabad.
All Special Chief Secretaries / Prl. Secretaries/Secretaries to Govt.
All Heads of Departments
All District Collectors
Copy to :
The Prl. Secretary to Govt. (SAR), Genl. Admn. Dept.
The Secretary to Govt. (Ser.), G.A.D.
The Secretary to Govt., Finance Department
The Secretary to Govt., Planning Department
The Secretary,A.P. Public Service Commission, Hyderabad
All Departments of Secretariat
The Pay & Accounts Officer, Hyderabad
The Deputy Pay & Accounts Officer, Secretariat Branch, Hyderabad
The Accountant General Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad
The Commissioner, Printing, Stationery, Chanchalguda, Hyderabad with a Request to notify in the A.P. Gazette and supply 50 copies.
All Recognized Service Associations
The I & PR, Publicity Cell, Secretariat, Hyderabad
The G.A. (OP.I/OP.II/OP.III/OP.IV/SB/Claims/Spl.A/Spl.B) Dept.
The Finance Department
The P.S. to Prl. Secretary to Chief Minister
The P.S. to Chief Secretary
The P.S. to Prl. Secretary to Govt. (SAR), G.A. Dept.
The P.S. to Secertary to Govt. (Services), G.A. Dept.
The P.S. to Secretary to Govt., Finance (R&E) Dept.
SF/SC.
//TRUE COPY//
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
* * *
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
ABSTRACT
ESTABLISHMENT – Six Point Formula – A.P.Public Employment (OLC & RDR) Order, 1975 – Implementations of G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-A) Department dated 30-12-1985 – One Man Commission with Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS (Retd) – Constituted – Orders – Issued – Extension of term of office for a period of one year with effect from 24-06-2002 – Orders - Issued
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SPF-A) DEPARTMENT
G.O.Ms.No.327 Dated the 22-07-2002
Read the following :-
1. G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-A) Department,
dated 30-12-1985.
2. G.O.Ms.No.270, General Administration (SPF-A) Department,
dated 25-06-2001.
3. Note, dated 28-06-2002 from the One Man Commission (SPF)
* * *
O R D E R:
In the G.O. 2nd read above, the Government have constituted a ‘One Man Commission’ with Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS (Retd.) to receive representations from Associations, Public, individuals on injustice done in implementation of G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-A) Department, dated 30-12-1985, and to sort-out anomalies. The term of the Commission was fixed as one year i.e., 24-06-2002. The Commission submitted its Preliminary Report to the Government on 06-10-2001. The Commission has to submit its final report and give its findings on the representations received. The Commission in the note read above, requested the Government to grant more time to complete its work.
2. Considering the work to be done by the ‘One Man Commission’, Government have decided to extend the term of the Commission for one more year i.e., up to 30-06-2003 on the same terms of reference as stipulated in the G.O. 2nd read above.
3. The expenditure on the ‘One Man Commission’ shall be debitable to the Head of Account “2052– Secretariat General Services – (090) Secretariat – (04) – G.A.D. – (010) – Salaries”.
4. This order issues with the concurrence of Finance Department vide their U.O. No. 1252/156/A1/EBS1/2002, dated 17-07-2002.
(BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH)
D. MURALI KRISHNA, IAS.,
To PRL. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS., (Retd)
H.No. 7-1-69/2 (New 640)
Dharamkaram Road, Ameerpet, Hyderabad.
Copy to : All Departments of Secretariat.
//TRUE COPY//
* * *
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
ABSTRACT
ESTABLISHMENT – Six Point Formula – A.P. Public Employment (OLC & RDR) Order, 1975 – Implementations of G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-A) Department dated 30-12-1985 – One Man Commission with Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS (Retd) – Constituted – Orders – Issued – Extension of term of office for a period of three months with effect from 01-07-2003 to
30-09-2003 – Orders - Issued
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SPF-A) DEPARTMENT
G.O.Rt.No.2755 Dated the 17-06-2003
Read the following :-
1. G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-A) Department,
dated 30-12-1985.
2. G.O.Ms.No.270, G A (SPF-A) Department, dated 25-06-2001.
3. G.O.Rt.No.3109, G A (SPF-A) Department, dated 18-07-2001.
4. G.O.Ms.No.327, G A (SPF-A) Department, dated 22-07-2002.
5. G.O.Ms.No.777, G A (SPF-A) Department, dated 14-02-2003.
6. G.O.Ms.No.874, G A (SC-F) Department, dated 19-02-2003.
7. Govt.Memo.No.29734/SPF.A/2002-3, G.A.(SPF.A) Department
dated 29-04-2003.
* * *
O R D E R:
In continuation of the orders issued in G.O. 5th read above, Government hereby decided to extend the term of office of Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS., (Retd.) as One Man Commission (Six Point Formula) for a further period of three months with effect from 30-06-2003 to 30-09-2003.
2. The period of extension will also apply to Sri P. Mohan Lal, Ex-Officio Joint Secretary and OSD to the Commission on contract basis. The Secretarial assistance provided to the Commission will also be continued till 30-09-2003.
3. Permission is also extended to hire the private vehicles as ordered in Govt. Memo 7th read above up to 30-09-2003 within the general budget allotted to the General Administration Department pending provision of additional budget.
4. The expenditure on the ‘One Man Commission’ shall be debitable to the Head of Account “2052– Secretariat General Services – (090) Secretariat – (04) – G.A.D. – (010) – Salaries and also 510 – Motor Vehicles”.
4. This order issues with the concurrence of Finance Department vide their U.O. No. 14672/158/Expr.GAD.1/A1/2003, dated 16-06-2003.
(BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH)
B. ARAVINDA REDDY
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (SER)
To
Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS., (Retd)
H.No. 7-1-69/2 (New 640)
Dharamkaram Road, Ameerpet, Hyderabad.
Copy to : xxxxx xxxxx
//TRUE COPY//
* * *
PLEASE SEE THE STATEMENTS OF THIS APPENDIX IN THE XLS FORMAT AT THE END OF THE REPORT.
Appendix-VI
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
Letter No.06/86/OMC(A.1)2002-1, Dt : 01-11-2002
FROM :
J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS, (Retd.)
One Man Commission (SPF)
General Administration Department
‘K’ Block, 2nd Floor, Room No. 327
A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad
To
The Secretary to Government
General Administration (Services) Department
A.P. Secretariat
Hyderabad
Sir,
Sub : SPF – Presidential Order (OMC) – Gazetting of posts after the issue of Presidential Order - Reg.
Ref : OMC (SPF) Preliminary Report submitted to the Government in October, 2001.
* * *
Kindly refer Commission’s Preliminary report, Preliminary Finding Nos. 12A to 12D with particular reference to sub-Para (ii) of Para 2.28.0 of the Preliminary Finding 12A (xerox copy of the finding is enclosed for ready reference). After this Report, the Commission has had occasion to hold meetings with the Officers of the Heads of the Departments to find out about the deviations if any from the Presidential Order. One of the most important issues that has come to the notice of the Commission is that in many departments the posts which were hitherto Non-gazetted before 18-10-1975, the date of the Presidential Order, have been made Gazetted either with the same designation or with some change of designation. As Non-Gazetted posts these were zonal posts with 70% preference for local candidates. On becoming Gazetted, the posts become State-wide posts and also lose the preference for the local candidates. Thus, through this process the Presidential Order is getting diluted in respect of many important posts at the zonal level and local candidates of all the zones are losing the advantage of localisation and preference. Apart from the posts that have come to the notice of this Commission, the Commission understands that there is a demand from many Service Associations for Gazetting some of their posts and that these demands have been referred to Anomalies Commission for examination. The Anomalies Commission will no doubt examine the administrative and other aspects of the demands for making the posts Gazetted. But the one aspect that needs to be safeguarded is that when a post is Gazetted or any change is made in a post, its original local character should be preserved so that the Presidential Order is not diluted and local candidates’ interests are not adversely affected. It is found that some of the posts which were gazetted after 18-10-1975 were got included by the Government in the Third Schedule of the Presidential Order in the category of Specified Gazetted Posts. One finds from the Third Schedule that even up to 1993 some posts were added to this category, but not all the posts that have been gazetted to-date have been added to this category.
Adding to the Third Schedule of Presidential Order under the category of Specified Gazetted Posts only preserves the zonal character of the post, but that brings no solace to the local candidates because the preference for local candidates does not apply to all the posts which are included in this category excepting for a few posts like Tahsildars and Assistant Engineers etc., in this Schedule which were originally given the preference of 60% for local candidates. Thus inclusion to this category also does not restore the local candidate preference of 70% which is lost when a Non-Gazetted post is Gazetted. In many of the cases that have come before the Commission, the posts have not even been brought to the Specified Gazetted Category after being gazetted so that even the zonal character is lost. In two cases: one of the Forest Range Officer in the Forest Department and another of Prohibition and Excise Inspectors, the proposal for inclusion in the Third Schedule as Specified Gazetted Category Posts was even rejected by the Government of India. On the latter case this Commission has written to you already.
This process of gazetting is resulting in consequences which are against the principle enunciated in the Preliminary Findings cited above. You may kindly recall that this particular finding had found favour with the Cabinet Sub-Committee in the presence of the Hon’ble Chief Minister, who had also agreed with it in principle. This was also presented before the Cabinet. It is therefore more or less an agreed principle. The reason for the recommendations in these findings cited above is that if we do not accept the principle of immutability of the local character of the posts as it stood at the time of the Presidential Order, then the Government would find it difficult to deny the demands for expanding the scope of the Presidential Order in so many other dimensions. This is one of the demands in the G.O.Ms.No.610. It will be found in G.O.Ms.No.610, one of the demand which the Government had agreed to look into was Para 5(5) and 5(9) which reads as under:
Para 5(5)
The posts in Institutions/Establishment notified in G.S.R.No.526(E), dated 18-10-1975 shall be filled up by drawing persons on tenure basis from different local cadres on an equitable basis as per orders issued in the G.O. 3rd read above.
Para 5(9)
The possibility of allotting persons from within the same zone/multi-zone against non-local vacancy in a particular cadre will be examined in consultation with the APPSC.
Thereafter, the Services Associations particularly of Telangana have also made demands for extending the Presidential Order to Corporations and other quasi-government organisations which are now outside the Presidential Order. To put finality to the scope of the Presidential Order this Commission had suggested that we should also accept to put a stop to the abridgement of the scope of the Presidential Order and give an assurance to the Employees Association to this effect, while not expanding its scope.
The abridgement of the Presidential Order and the leakage of localized posts through this process of gazetting is against the principle that the Presidential Order’s scope shall not be mutated i.e., neither expanded nor abridged. If it is allowed to be abridged then the counter demands for expansion of the scope cannot be easily ignored.
In pursuance of this principle of immutability of the local character of a post as it stood on the date of the Presidential Order the Government have taken care to ensure that the posts of the Secondary Grade Teachers were retained as district cadre posts and later on the Government took further action to ensure that the original 80% preference for local candidates was also restored even though the scale of the post had been raised by the 1994 Pay Revision Commission above the level of the LDC Scales, which would normally have made it a zonal post with 70% preference. Having accepted the principle of immutability and applied it in the case of the Secondary Grade Teachers it is but fair that the same principle be applied wherever there is any administrative action or change that mutates the original local character of a post. This will give finality and stability to the Presidential Order amidst the dynamics of a progressive and expanding administrative system.
In pursuance of this principle and in view of the dimensions mentioned above, it is suggested as under :-
1. That all the posts that were gazetted after 18-10-1975 should be got included in the Third Schedule to the Presidential Order as Specified Gazetted Categories. This will ensure the zonal character of the posts and retain the zone as “local area” for the posts.
2. To retain the 70% preference for the local candidates which applied to these posts before being Gazetted as they were Non-Gazetted zonal posts.
3. In respect of the posts which are pending consideration for being gazetted, if the Gazetted status is granted on administrative grounds then ‘ipso facto’ a reference to the Government of India may be made immediately on the lines mentioned above under (1) and (2) so that their local character is not mutated.
4. In cases which were referred to the Government of India and have been rejected for inclusion in the Third Schedule i.e., Specified Gazetted Category, the cases may be reopened and action taken as suggested at (1) and (2) above.
A list of the posts that have come to the notice of the Commission which have been Gazetted with or without changes in designation after the Presidential Order is enclosed. This list is not exhaustive but information may be collected from all the departments so that in one single reference Government of India’s orders may be obtained. (Please see Annexure-3 herein).
It is also suggested that the action on this matter may be taken expeditiously particularly in view of the pending demands for gazetting of some posts in some of the departments.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
One Man Commission (SPF)
Copy to
(1) Sri S.V. Prasad, IAS, Principal Secretary to Chief Minister, with reference to personal discussion in the matter.
(2) OMC(SPF-A), GAD with a request to include this under the category of General issues of Gazetting of posts after the issue of Presidential Order.
* * *
D.O.Lr.No.06/86/OMC(A.1)/2002-2, dt: 21.05.2003
Dear Sri Arvinda Reddy,
Sub:- SPF – Presidential Order (OMC) – Gazetting of posts after the issue of Presidential Order – Reg.
Ref:- My Lr.No.06/86/OMC(A.1)/2002-1, dt: 01.11.2002.
* * *
Kindly refer my letter cited above. As I mentioned to you on phone few days back, I understand that all the proposals for gazetting of posts submitted by various Departments/ Associations have been referred to Anomalies Commission. I had also mentioned this in my letter cited. This is an advanced stage of action in the matter of deciding about the gazetting of certain posts. After the Anomalies Commission recommendations it will be much more difficult to halt the gazetting process. As I pointed out, it is desirable to bring this process to a halt in the interest of local candidates under the Presidential Order who stand to suffer by gazetting of posts, because they will lose the benefit of the local cadre and the preference in direct recruitment to the extent of 70%. I have also proposed that in respect of the posts already gazetted, Government of India’s orders may be obtained so that they will continue to be zonal posts with 70% preference for local candidates, thereby preserving the advantage which was attached to these posts before being gazetted on the principle of immutability of the local cadre & reservation for local candidates of posts that existed on 18.10.1975.
In this connection, it may also be mentioned that some departments that have got their posts gazetted after 18.10.1975 are continuing to treat them as zonal posts with 70% for locals. While this ensures that the pre-gazetting advantage of the post is not lost for the locals, it is in contravention of the Presidential Order because, once the post becomes gazetted, it ceases to have the advantage under the Presidential Order which was attached to it when it was a non-gazetted post. The Head of the Department cannot by his own authority continue these advantages howsoever desirable to do so. So, from that point of view also to validate their action, it is necessary to obtain from the Government of India, orders as indicated above, for all posts gazetted after 18.10.1975. While doing so, an immediate halt may be ordered on any further gazetting of posts including proposals already received or referred to Anomalies Commission.
With regards,
Yours sincerely,
Sd/-
(J.M. GIRGLANI)
Sri B. Aravinda Reddy, IAS.,
Secretary to Government (Ser.),
General Administration (SPF) Department.
* * *
Appendix-VII
Copy of:
Genl. Admn. Dept.,
O/O Secy. (services)
NOTE
It is understood that the Anomalies Commission is examining certain proposals made from the Departments of Secretariat for up-gradation of a few non-gazetted posts in to gazetted posts. The up-gradation of non-gazetted posts into gazetted posts has implications under the Presidential Order, which lays down the principles of localization and organisation of local cadres in the State.
In view of the above position, it is requested that before a decision is taken for upgrading non-gazetted posts into gazetted posts, the views of the General Administration (SPF-A) Department may kindly be taken into consideration.
Sd/-
Secretary (Services)
Dt. 1st May 2003
Sri R. Ramachandra, IAS, (Retd),
Chairman, Anomalies Commission.
* * *
Appendix-VIII
D.O.Lr.No.6169/OMC/A/2001- Dt.26–10-2002
Dear Sri Aravind Reddy Garu,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Presidential Order – Posts Gazetted after the Presidential Order –Inclusion in Specified Gazetted Category (Third Schedule) – Case of Prohibition and Excise Inspectors – Reg.
Ref: 1. Preliminary findings no.12A, 12B, 12C, 12D in the Preliminary Report of OMC submitted in October, 2001 (extracts enclosed for ready reference).
2. Lr.No.78360/Excise.I/1993-22, Dt.9.10.2002 from the Revenue Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh addressed to OMC (SPF) (copy enclosed).
***
It may be seen from the reference 2nd cited above that the Government in the Revenue Department had declared the post of Prohibition and Excise Inspectors as Gazetted in G.O.Ms.No.335, Revenue (Excise-I) Department, dt.26.4.1997. In pursuance of this the department had approached General Administration (SPF) Department to obtain the orders of the Government of India for inclusion of the post in the Specified Gazetted Category i.e., in The Third Schedule to the Presidential Order, so as to maintain the zonal character of the post. From the reference 2nd cited, it is clear that the Government of India has rejected the proposal.
In this connection, I may invite kind attention to the Preliminary Findings of this Commission cited above in its Preliminary Report. This Report was presented twice before Hon’ble Chief Minster, before the concerned Cabinet Sub-Committee on G.O.Ms.NO.610 and also before the Cabinet. Hon’ble Chief Minister and the Cabinet Sub-Committee had accepted in principle these particular findings though there is no formal order to this effect and even acted on it in the case of Secondary Grade Teachers. In this context therefore when some posts are gazetted after the Presidential Order, they should not lose either their zonal character or their preference percentage (reservation percentage) for local candidates. In all such cases the posts were Non-Gazetted before being Gazetted and were therefore zonal posts with 70 per cent preference for local candidates. By being Gazetted, both these localization advantages of zonal posts and 70% preference get obliterated. Therefore, in view of the acceptance of the principle of immutability of the local character of a post on change of designation up-gradation, gazetting etc., the case may be referred back to the Government of India for accepting the proposal. A fresh proposal may be sent to the Government of India for not only inclusion of the post in the Specified Gazetted Category but also for retaining the 70 per cent preference for local candidates.
I may, however, suggest that before sending the proposal, you may like to discuss the matter with the Principal Secretary to Chief Minister, Sri S.V.Prasad, IAS.. I have already discussed this issue as a general issue for all the posts that have been Gazetted after the Presidential Order. In his view the matter might have to be taken up with the Centre as a general issue first at the Chief Minister’s level. Therefore before sending the proposal you may kindly have a word with Mr.S.V.Prasad and find out whether this single proposal may be sent or whether we may await the general issue being taken up first with the Government of India.
Yours sincerely,
Sd/- (J.M.GIRGLANI)
Sri B.ARVINDA REDDY, IAS
Secretary to Government (Services)
General Administration (SAR) Department
A.P.Secretariat
Hyderabad
Copy to Sri S.V.Prasad, IAS, Prinicipal Secretary to Chief Minister with reference to my discussion with you on 21st October, 2002
* * *
PRELIMINARY FINDING – 12(A)
Local Character of Posts Immutable :
2.28.0 Arising from this is another anomaly that the Commission would request the Government to kindly focus its kind urgent attention on. It is that the character of a post as belonging to the district or zonal or multi-zonal cadre as of 18-10-1975, the date of coming into effect of the Presidential Order, cannot be changed by any action of any type, like up-gradation or down-gradation etc. Thus: -
(i) If a post’s pay scale is changed into a higher pay-scale, it will still continue to belong to the same cadre as its original cadre as of 18-10-1975, viz., District, Zonal or multi-zonal, as the case may be, for purposes of “local area”. It should also continue to have the same percentage of reservation for local candidates, 80, 70 or 60 as the case may be as it had as of 18-10-1975.
(ii) Similarly, a post may be made gazetted, from its original non-Gazetted status as of 18-10-1975, but that shall not take it outside the purview of the Presidential Order, nor change its Cadre, or Local Area (Dist. Zone or multi-zone as it was on 18-10-1975), nor can the reservation percentage be changed from the original percentage as of 18-10-1975.
Any modification or mutation of these basic principles, even with the consent of the Government of India, should be deemed to be violation of the Presidential Order. The Commission has been informed of many posts that have been gazetted after 18-10-1975, but which have not been brought under the Presidential Order. Such as have been brought, have been brought under changed reservation percentage to 60%, not the original zonal non-gazetted post percentage of 70%. These anomalies or unintended violations, whatever they may be called, need to be set right. Their “local area” also cannot change.
PRELIMINARY FINDING – 12(B)
(iii) Where the pay-scale of a non-gazetted post is enhanced from that of L.D.C. equivalent scale, its local area and reservation percentage should not change. The case in point is that of Secondary School teachers. While, on enhancement of their pay-scale their local area has been rightly kept as the District, the percentage of reservation has been changed to 70 from the original 80, for no explicable reason. The contradiction and anomaly is evident ‘prima facie’.
(iv) When a field office, like a regional office, is abolished and the staff is shifted to the H.O.D Office, the posts of the field office, such as regional office etc. so abolished, should continue to have the same character under the Presidential Order with the same local area and local candidate reservation percentage. The case in point is that of the abolition of certain regional offices like those of the Cooperative Department and shifting of the posts to Head of the Department office. There could be more circumstances of the same genre where the same principle will apply.
PRELIMINARY FINDING – 12(C)
2.28.1 Why are these principles sacrosanct ? Because, otherwise the entire Presidential Order can be bled out through the haemorrhage of up-gradations, Gazetting and upward revisions of pay scales,abolition of field offices and shifting of their staff to the H.O.D.office or any such acts. Mere consent of the Government of India is not an adequate safeguard, because at this length of time, and particularly when there is no agitation or a vigilance device for the Six Point Formula, the Government of India would go by the State Government’s recommendation, which, in normal times would be based on administrative exigencies or staff demands in general. The Six Point Formula would not enter the thoughts of the proposers and acceptors in the context of other stresses of the moment, be they administrative or staff union pressures.
PRELIMINARY FINDING – 12(D)
2.28.2 Hence, the immutable spirit of the Presidential Order must be made sacrosanct. In law it might fall under the concept of “pith and substance”, or what the Supreme Court has pronounced as the “Basic Framework” principle (in respect of the Constitution) which cannot be changed by amendment. Presidential Order too is a Constitutional Order, not a legislated one and represents a part of that fine balance that holds together the State as a single political entity. Hence, its ‘Basic Framework’ should not be tampered with. All administrative changes must conform to the ‘Basic Framework’ of the Presidential Order, making that framework immutable, unless by a Constitutional amendment of the Presidential Order itself undergoes any change.
* * *
Appendix-IX
The Gazette of India
EXTRAORDINARY
Part II – Section 3 – Sub-section (ii)
Published by Authority
No.902} NEW DELHI , DECEMBER 13, 2001/AGRAHAYANA 22,1923
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
ORDER
New Delhi, the 13th December, 2001
S.O. 1219(E)-In exercise of the powers conferred by clauses (1) and (2) of article 371 D of the Constitution of India, the President hereby makes, with respect to the State of Andhra Pradesh, the following Order to amend the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975, namely :-
1. (1) This order may be called the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment (Amendment) Order, 2001.
(2) It extends to the whole of the State of Andhra Pradesh.
(3) Save as otherwise provided, it shall come into force from the date of publication in the Official Gazette.
2. In the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975,-
(1) In paragraph 2, in sub-paragraph (1), the clause (a), the following shall be added, namely :-
“The territorial jurisdiction in respect of the posts belonging to the Department of school Education shall be the Revenue District of Hyderabad”.
(2) In paragraph 8, in sub-paragraph (1) after item (b), the following item shall be deemed to have been added with effect from the 1st day of June 2001, namely :-
“C. (i) in any local cadre under the State Government comprising posts belonging to the categories of teachers in the Andhra Pradesh School Education Subordinate Service and all other similar or equivalent categories of posts of teachers under any Department of the State Government ; and
(ii) in any cadre under a local authority or under any such other management, as may be notified by the State Government from time to time carrying a scale of pay equal to that of posts in the Andhra Pradesh School Education Subordinate Service shall be reserved in favour of local candidates in relation to the local area in respect of such cadre”.
3. In paragraph 8, in sub-paragraph (2) in item (a) for the words and figure “in item (a) of sub-paragraph (1)”, the words and figure “in item (a) or in item (c) of sub-paragraph (1)”, shall be substituted.
[File No.21012/3/2001-SR]
R K SINGH, Jt. Secy.
Foot Note : The Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975, was published in the Gazette of India vide G.S.R.No.524 (E), dated the 18th October, 1975 and amended vide :-
1. G.S.R. 850 (E) dated 18-10-1976
2. G.S.R. 78 (E) dated 22-02-1977
3. G.S.R. 186 (E) dated 16-04-1977
4. G.S.R. 392 (E) dated 22-06-1977
5. G.S.R. 648 (E) dated 17-10-1977
6. G.S.R. 5 (E) dated 01-01-1981
7. G.S.R. 525 (E) dated 28-06-1985
8. G.S.R. 1121 (E) dated 18-11-1986
9. G.S.R. 742 (E) dated 15-10-1993
10. SO 29 (E) dated 10-01-2000
11. SO 106 (E) dated 03-02-2000
* * *
PLEASE SEE THE CONTENTS OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS PERTAINING TO APPENDIX NOS. X, XI, XII, XII-A, AND XII-B IN THE XLS FORMAT AT THE END OF THE REPORT
ANNEXURES
INDEX
No - Annexures - Page Nos.
1 ANNEXURE – List of Heads of Departments 28-30
2 Extract of High Court Judgement in W.P.Nos.13458,
13545,13558,13572,15101,19341 and 19375 of 01. 31-51
3 Posts Gazetted after the issue of Presidential Order
(18.10.1975) 52
4 Posts kept outside the purview of the APPSC 53-55
5 Posts under the purview of District Selection
Committees 56
6 APPSC, Attestation Form 57-59
7 Karnataka Act No.11 of 1974 60-71
8 Employees Census 2001 (Regular Govt. Employees) 72
9 Employees Census 2001 (Regular Rural Local Body
Employees) 72
10 Employees Census 2001 (Regular Urban Local
Body Employees) 72
11 Proforma:OMC-5A – Information on District Local
Cadre Posts 72
12 Proforma:OMC-5B – Information on District Local
Cadre Posts - (Abstract) and Tables 2A to 2E &
3A to 3D 72
13 Note on Para 5 (14) of G.O.Ms.No.610 in respect of
13 Deputy Executive Engineers of Public Health &
Municipal Engineering Department 73-74
14 G.O.Ms.No.128,M.A, Dt. 11.02.1981,
G.O.Ms.No.245,M.A, Dt.20.05.1986 and
G.O.Ms.No.77,M.A, Dt.4.03.1997 of
Housing, Municipal Administration and
Urban Development Department. 75-84
* * *
Annexure-1
PROPOSED NEW ANNEXURE
TO THE G.O.P.NO.728, G.A. (SPF.A) DEPT., Dt. 01-11-1975
LIST OF HEADS OF DEPARTMENTS
1. Commissioner of Agriculture.
2. Director of Animal Husbandry.
3. Commissioner of State Archives & Research Institute.
4. Director of Adult Education.
5. Director of State Audit.
6. Commissioner of Archaeology and Museums.
7. Commissioner for Backward Classes.
8. Director of Boilers.
9. Commissioner for Co-operation & Registrar of Co-operative Societies.
10. Commissioner Collegiate Education.
11. Commissioner of Civil Supplies.
12. Commissioner for Commercial Taxes.
13. Director of Cultural Affairs
14. Addl. Director General, Drugs Control Administration.
15. Commissioner of Disabled Welfare.
16. Director of Government Examinations.
17. Chief Electrical Inspector.
18. Director of Employment and Training.
19. Director of Economics and Statistics.
20. Commissioner of Endowments.
21. Commissioner of Fisheries.
22. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests.
23. Director General of Fire Services.
24. Director of Factories.
25. Director of Ground Water Department.
26. Director of Horticulture.
27. Director of Health.
28. Commissioner of Handlooms and Textiles.
29. Commissioner of Intermediate Education.
30. Director of Insurance.
31. Director, Information & Public Relations.
32. Director General, Dr. Marri Channa Reddy Human Resource Development Institute (IOA).
33. Commissioner of Indian Medicine & Homeopathy.
34. Commissioner of Industries.
35. Engineer-in-Chief (Admn.Wing) Irrigation & Command Area Development.
36. Director of Insurance Medical Services.
37. Director of Jawarhar Bal Bhavan.
38. Commissioner, Juvenile Welfare & Correctional Services.
39. Director of Public Libraries & Registrar of Publications.
40. Controller of Legal Meteorology.
41. Commissioner of Labour.
42. Chief Commissioner of Land Administration.
43. Director of Marketing.
44. Director of Mines and Geology.
45. Director of Municipal Administration.
46. Director, N.C.C.
47. Director of Govt Oriental Manuscripts Library and Research Institute.
48. Director of Protocol.
49. Director of Institute of Preventive Medicine, Public Health, Lab. Food (Health) Administration.
50. Director General & Inspector General of Police.
51. Director General & Inspector General of Prisons and Correctional Services.
52. Director of Prosecutions.
53. Engineer-in-Chief, Public Health.
54. Commissioner of Panchayat Raj.
55. Engineer-in-Chief, Panchayat Raj.
56. Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise.
57. Director of State Ports.
58. Commissioner of Rural Development.
59. Inspector General of Registration and Stamps.
60. Engineer-In-Chief, Roads and Buildings.
61. Commissioner of Sericulture.
62. Commissioner & Director of School Education.
63. Commissioner of Small Savings & State Lottries.
64. Commissioner and Director of Sugar and Cane Commissioner.
65. Commissioner of Survey Settlements, Land Records, Settlements and Jagir Administration.
66. Director of Sainik Welfare.
67. Commissioner of Social Welfare.
68. Commissioner of Technical Education.
69. Director of A.P Govt Text Book Press.
70. Director of Treasuries and Accounts.
71. Director of Translations.
72. Director of Town and Country Planning.
73. Commissioner of Tribal Welfare.
74. Chief Engineer, Tribal Welfare.
75. Commissioner of Transport.
76. Director of Tourism.
77. Director of Works Accounts.
78. Commissioner, Women Empowerment & Self Employment.
79. Director, Women Development & Child Welfare.
80. Director of Youth Services.
81. Registrar, A.P. High Court.
82. Member Secretary, State Legal Services Authority.
83. A.P Judicial Academy.
84. A.P Administrative Tribunal.
85. Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings.
86. Lok Ayuktha & Upa Lokayuktha.
87. A.P Sales Tax Appellete Tribunal.
88. Special Court under A.P Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act.
89. A.P Co-operative Tribunal.
90. A.P State Transport Appellete Tribunal.
91. A.P WAKF Tribunal.
92. Chairman Cum Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Visakhapatnam.
93. Chairman Cum Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Guntur.
94. Chairman Cum Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Warangal.
95. Chairman Cum Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Anantapur.
96. Chairman Cum Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Karimnagar.
97. Chairman Cum Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad I.
98. Chairman Cum Presiding Officer,
Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court at Hyderabad II.
99. Chairman Cum Presiding Officer,
Additional Industrial Tribunal Hyderabad.
100. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court I Hyderabad.
101. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court II Hyderabad.
102. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court III Hyderabad.
Note : The designations of some of Heads, change with their ranks.
* * *
EXTRACTS OF HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT IN W. P. Nos. 13458, 13545, 13558, 13572, 15101, 19341 AND 19375 OF 2001
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI S.B. SINHA
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.R. NAYAK
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
JUDGEMENT: (per the HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
All these Writ Petitions arising out of common order of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.2139 of 2001 and batch-dated 28-06-2001 were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgement.
ISSUE
The core issue involved in these writ petitions is whether the transfer of the Inspectors of Police to the unit of Hyderabad City Police from other zones or the transfer of Inspectors of Police from one zone to another, as the case may be, made on administrative grounds and in public interest was on permanent basis and consequently they are entitled to take their respective seniority in the units to which they were transferred and whether they can be repatriated back to their parent zones?
Preview of the relevant provisions of the Presidential Order and consequential orders issued by the Government:
Pursuant to Six Point Formula agreed upon by various political leaders of the State, by Constitution 32nd Amendment Act, the Parliament introduced Article 371-D for the State of Andhra Pradesh with the object to ensure equitable opportunities in the matter of Public Employment for persons coming from various parts of the State. In exercise of the powers conferred by Clauses (1) and (2) of Article 371-D of the Constitution of India, the President issued the order known as Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 (for short ‘the Presidential Order’). Para 3 of the Order provides for organisation of Local Cadres. Para 3 (2) provides that the posts belonging to the category of Junior Assistants and to each of the other categories equivalent to, or lower than that of a Junior Assistant in each department in each district shall be organised into separate cadre. Under sub-Para (3), the posts belonging to each non-gazetted category, other than those referred to in sub-paragraph (2), in each department in each zone shall be organised into a separate cadre. As per Para 3(4), the posts belonging to each specified gazetted category in each department in each zone shall be organised into a separate cadre. As per Third Schedule appended to the Order, Inspectors of Police in Police Department is a Specified Gazetted Category (S.No.51). According to Para 2(1) (m), zone means a zone specified in the Second Schedule, comprising the territories mentioned therein. As per the Second Schedule, Hyderabad comes under Zone VI which consists of Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy, Nizamabad, Mahaboobnagar, Medak and Nalgonda district. Under the Second Schedule, six zones have been created in the State for the purpose of the Presidential Order. Para 6 deals with local areas. As per Para 6(2)(ii), the posts of Inspectors of Police shall be regarded as a zonal post.
Under Sub-paragraph (6) of Para 3 notwithstanding anything contained in sub-paragraphs (2), (3), (4) and (5), the Central Government was empowered to notify the departments in which and the categories of posts for which a separate cadre has to be organised for the City of Hyderabad and on such notification, the posts belonging to each such category in each such department in the City of Hyderabad (other than those concerned with the administration of areas falling outside the said City) shall be organised into a separate cadre and the posts so organised shall be excluded from the other cadres, organised in pursuance of Para 3 or constituted otherwise and comprising of posts belonging to that category in that department. The Central Government in G.S.R. 528(E) dated 18-10-1975 issued notification under Para 3(6) and the Police Department is not part of such notification. Therefore the Police Department in the city is part of Zone VI only and no separate city cadre has been constituted for any of the categories in the Department. Para 4 of the Order deals with allotment of persons.
Now, we may refer to Para 5 and 14 of the Order which are relevant for our purpose. Para 5, which deals with Local Cadres and transfer of persons, reads thus:
5: Local cadres and transfer of persons: (1) Each part of the State for which a local cadre has been organised in respect of any category of posts, shall be a separate unit for purpose of recruitment, appointment, discharge, seniority, promotion and transfer, and such other matters as my be specified by the State Government, in respect of that category of posts.
(2) Nothing in this Order shall prevent the State Government from making provision for-
(a) the transfer of a person from any local cadre to any office or Establishment to which this Order does not apply, or vice-versa;
(b) the transfer of a person from a local cadre comprising posts in any Office or Establishment exzercising territorial jurisdiction over a part of the State to any other local cadre comprising posts in such part, or vice-versa;
(c) the transfer of a person from one local cadre to another local cadre where no qualified or suitable person is available in the latter cadre on where such transfer is otherwise considered necessary in the public interest; and
(d) the transfer of a person from one local cadre to another local cadre on a reciprocal basis, subject to the condition that the person so transferred shall be assigned seniority in the latter cadre with reference to the date of his transfer to that Cadre.
Under Para 5(1) for the purpose of recruitment, appointment, discharge, seniority, promotion and transfer and such other matters as may be specified by the State Government, each part of the State for which a local cadre has been organised is the Unit. The category of Inspectors of Police is a zonal post. Therefore, zone is the unit for the matters mentioned in Para5(1).
Under Para 14 of the Order, certain Establishments and posts are saved or exempted from the application of the Presidential Order. Para 14(f), which is relevant for the purpose of this case, reads thus:
Saving : Nothing in this Order shall apply to –X X X
(f) any post of Police Officer as defined in Clause (b) of Section 3 of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348F.
The President by various notifications specified the Special Offices or Establishments, Major Development Projects and State Level Offices or Institutions for the purposes of Para 14. In the Police Department, Police Training College, Ananthapur, Deputy Inspector General of Police (Intelligence), Deputy Inspector General of Police (Railways, Crime and Training), Police Transport Organisation, office of the Director Police Communication, Office of the Forensic Science Laboratory are included in the notification. By operation of Para 14 (f) the posts of Police Officers defined in Hyderabad City Police Act are saved from the provisions of the Presidential Order.
Ascertained cadre strength, allotment of persons under Para 4 and unit of appointment are, therefore, basic requirements for ensuring the object underlined under the Presidential Order.
Clause (10 of Article 371-D provides that the provisions of the Article and of any order made by the President thereunder shall have effect notwithstanding anything in any other provision of the Constitution or any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, the Presidential Order prevails over any other law existing or made in future.
Sub-section (b) of Section 3 of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 F defines “Police Officer” to mean every member of the City Police Force appointed under the said Act and shall also include the Commissioner of City Police, Hyderabad, Deputy or Assistant Commissioner of Police. Section 4 of the Hyderabad City Police Act, which deals with Organisation of Police, reads thus:
Organisation of Police: For the City of Hyderabad there shall be appointed a Police force and its strength and constitution shall be as may be prescribed in accordance with the orders of the government issued in this behalf, from time to time.
The State enacted an Act called the Andhra Pradesh Members of Police Force (Regulation of Transfers) Act, 1985 (Act 9 of 1985) (for short ‘the Act,1985’) to regulate the transfer of persons appointed to Police Force in the State of Andhra Pradesh. ‘Police Force’ has been defined under sub-section (b) of section 3 of the said Act, to mean the Police force constituted under the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 F, (the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) District Police Act, 1859) and the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) District Police Act, 1329 F or any other law relating to police force.
Section 3, which deals with regulation of transfer read thus:
Regulation of transfer of members of police force: (1) Notwithstanding anything in any law for time being in force, a member of the Police Force, shall be liable to serve in any part of the State of Andhra Pradesh.
The Government may make rules for the regulation of transfer of members of Police force from one part of the State to another part within the State of Andhra Pradesh by such authority as may be prescribed.
Section 4 empowers the Government to make rules for carrying out the purpose of the said Act.
The State in exercise of the powers conferred under sub-paragraph (2) of Paragraph 5 of the Presidential Order read with sub-section (2) of Section 3 and sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act, 1985 issued rules in G.O.Ms.No.288, Home (Police-C) Department dated 06-05-1986 called the rules for the regulation of transfer of members of police force from one part of the State to another part within the State of Andhra Pradesh. The rules shall apply to every member of the Police force from the rank of Police Constable to the rank of Inspector and of equivalent ranks working in various police organisations. In terms of entry No.1 of the table under Rule 2, for all ranks in Police Department, the competent authority to effect transfer is Director General and Inspector General of Police or by an authority authorised by him.
Rule 3 which speaks of seniority provides
Seniority: The transfers being on administrative grounds and in public interest, the transferees will take their respective seniority in the Units to which they are transferred.
Under Rule 4 of the said Rules, the appointing authority for the transferees will be the same as that prescribed in the concerned Special Rules relating to the Unit to which they are transferred. Subsequent to the issuance of the Act, 1985 and the Rules, numbers of persons working in the category of Inspectors of Police were transferred from one zone to another on administrative grounds including the Hyderabad City. Such transfer orders did mention that the seniority of such transferees would be maintained in the range to which they were transferred.
The State Government made several provisions under Para 5(2)(c) of the Presidential Order. In the G.O.Ms.No.374 GAD(SPF.A) Department dated 20-05-1977, it was provided that no provision for inter-local cadre transfers need be made in any special or ad hoc rules on and that such transfers will be permitted only under the circumstances stipulated in Para 5(2)(c).
In G.O.Ms.No.569 GAD dated 22-08-1977 an ad hoc rules was issued to the following effect:
Notwithstanding anything in the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules or the Special or Adhoc rules transfer of a person, holding post in a category organised into local cadre, under Para 3 of the A.P. Public Employment (Organisation of Local cadres under regulation of direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 as amended from one local cadre to another shall be made by the Government where no qualified or suitable person is available in the latter cadre or where such transfer is otherwise considered necessary in the public interest.
To give effect to Para 5(2)(d) which was inserted by G.O.Ms.No.34 GAD dated
24-01-1981, the Government in G.O.Ms.No.539 GAD dated 01-10-1981 issued the amendment to the above ad hoc rule as under:
Notwithstanding anything in the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, or the Special or the Ad hoc rules transfer of a person, holding post in a category organised into local cadres, under Paragraph 3 of the A.P. Public Employment (Organisation of Local cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 as amended from one local cadre to another may be made by the Government.
(a) Against a vacancy where no qualified or suitable person is available in the latter cadre or where such transfer is otherwise considered necessary in the public interest; and
(b) on reciprocal basis, subject to the condition that transfers should be assigned seniority with reference to the date of transfer in the cadre to which he is transferred.
BACKGROUND OF LITIGATION:
It appears that consequent to transfer of Inspectors of Police to Hyderabad City Police from other zones, litigation had ensued before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal challenging the validity of the Act, 1985. The Police Officers working in the Hyderabad City Police questioned the orders of transfer of Police Officers from other zonal cadres to the posts of in the Hyderabad City Police. A full Bench of the Tribunal in O.A.Nos.22622 to 635 of 1990 and batch of cases considered the validity of the Act and the Rules.
The Tribunal on a consideration of the various provisions of the Presidential Order and the ad hoc rules issued by the Government was of the view that the transfers of non-gazetted officers or the first level gazetted officers occupying the posts saved by Para 14 may be made in public interest and in the interests of the administration but at the same time, such transfers cannot be made as a punishment by posting the persons to distant places or to effect their future careers like promotion etc. Referring to entry 1 of Rule 2 of the Rules, the Tribunal observed :
It does not make any distinction between the posts organised in zonal cadres or covered by the Presidential Order or those saved by the Presidential Order by Para 14. Such a provision is not contemplated by Para 5(2) and is inconsistent with the same.
The Tribunal also observed:
the table under Rule 2 does not indicate separately the post of a Police Officer as defined in the Hyderabad City Police Act which is saved by the Presidential Order. A transfer of such an officer to another post covered by the Presidential Order will not be permissible under the Act or the Rule. Rule 2 or any other rule does not refer to various clauses of
Para 5(2), which has to be kept in view for making a transfer with reference to each of the clauses.
The Tribunal further observed:
Rule 3 regarding seniority states that a transfer could be made in public interest and therefore Rule 2 extracted above merely states that the transfers being on administrative grounds and in public interest the transferees will take their respective seniority in the units to which they are transferred. The rules do not restrict the power of transfer only in public interest or on administrative grounds. No guidelines are laid down for the subordinate officers to make such transfer or dealt with which are the areas, which will answer the requirements of public interest or administrative grounds. In respect of the posts covered by the Presidential Order, the public interest is a ground only under Para 5(2)(c). The ad hoc rule framed under 309 reserves the power in the Government alone. By the impugned rules, the power is not only delegated to the Head of the Department and various officers but it can be further delegated by the Head of the Department to anyone else. The words ‘public interest’ and ‘administrative grounds’ in Rule 3, therefore, do not lay down any guidelines or put a fetter on the officers to transfer only in public interest or administrative grounds.
It was further held that provision made under Para 5(2) cannot be inconsistent with Clauses (a) to (d) of Para 5(2). However, the Tribunal did not examine the scope of various clauses under Para 5(2) or how the posts under 14(f) are to be dealt with on the ground that the rules do not satisfy the requirement of a provision to be made under Para 5(2). The Tribunal also held:
We would, therefore, like to point out to the instructions issued in G.O.P.No.728, GAD dated 01-11-1975 regarding determination of cadre strength of each local cadre by taking into account the proportionate number of posts in Office or establishments saved from the Presidential Order. This was with an idea that the posts in such office and establishments would generally be filled upon tenure basis by drawing persons from various zonal cadres on equitable basis to achieve the object of Article 371-D. Probably this may also have to be kept in view while making a provision under 5(2).
Finally, the Tribunal summed up the conclusions as under:
a) The Act and Rules do not violate Presidential Order insofar as a transfer is from a post saved under Para 14 of the Presidential Order to another post saved under Para 14 of a person not included in any local cadre under the Presidential Order.
b) The impugned Act and the Rules are not effective for making transfer in respect of local cadres i.e., either inter-cadre or from or to posts in the cadre to and from posts saved under Para 14 of the Presidential Order and for which provision is to be made by the Government in various clauses of 5(2) or of the persons included in any local cadre under Presidential Order.
c) It is open for the Government to make any further or other provision as contemplated by 5(2).
It is made clear that we have examined the question of transfer from the city police to another local cadre on a permanent basis. We have not examined transfers of police officers bona fide in public interest in exigencies of services for short periods without effecting their continuance and position in their local cadre or effecting their seniority in the local cadre to which they are so transferred or levelled by the Head of Department viz., DGP of Police. (emphasis supplied)
Therefore, according to the Tribunal no transfer from the inter-cadre posts to the posts saved under Para 14 or vice versa is permissible unless a provision is made by the Government under Para 5(2) and the rules do not satisfy the requirement of a provision to that effect.
Pursuant to the Judgement of the Tribunal, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.349 Home (Police.C) Department dated 15-12-1997 the relevant portion of which reads thus:
The Government of India and the Director General and Inspector General of Police Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad were consulted in the matter.
The Director General and Inspector General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad has suggested that the table in G.O.Ms.No.288, Home Department, dated 06-05-1986has to be suitably changed and Para 14 of the Presidential Order amended suitably in order to effect the transfers of police officers and men in public interest.
The Government after careful examination of the entire matter direct that the transfers of Police personnel from one local cadre to another local cadre be permitted only for a limited period without conferring any right to seniority in the local cadre to which, the individual is transferred even though the said transfer is on administrative grounds. Such transfer orders have to be issued by the Government duly indicating the reasons in each case in order to justify that the transfer is in public interest.
Pursuant to the said G.O. the Director General and Inspector General of Police sent proposals to the Government to repatriate all the officers who are working in other zones and the Government issued orders in G.O.Rt.No.2424 dated 25-11-1998 repatriating nine officers to their respective parent zones. Consequential repatriation orders were also issued by the authorities concerned.
The validity of G.O.Ms.No.349 and G.O.Rt.No.2424 was the subject-matter of challenge before the Tribunal.
FACTS:
We may now briefly refer to the factual aspects involved in the respective Writ Petitions with reference to the various orders issued by the authorities.
Sarvasri Sardar Harihar Singh, Y.Vijay Kumar (petitioners in W.P.No.13572 of 2001) Shaik Sharifuddin, and M.G.F. Santakumar (petitioner in W.P.No.13558 of 2001) filed O.A.No.7579 of 1998 questioning the aforesaid G.O.Ms.No.349 and consequential orders dated 15-12-2000 issued pursuant thereto. The petitioner No.1 in W.P.No.13572 of 2001 was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police in 1974 in Zone VI and he was promoted as Inspector of Police in 1998. By the proceedings of the Special Inspector General of Police (Admn.) dated 24-05-1988 he was transferred from Hyderabad Range to Hyderabad City Police on administrative grounds and in public interest. The order mentions that his seniority will be maintained in Hyderabad City Zone. The 2nd petitioner was appointed as Sub-Inspector in 1976 in Zone IV and was promoted as Inspector of Police in 1992. By the orders of the Spl. Inspector General of Police dated 16-06-1994 he was transferred to Hyderabad City Police on temporary basis on administrative grounds and in public interest subject to the result of O.A.No.22622 of 1990 and batch. The order of the 2nd respondent mention that his seniority will be maintained in Kurnool Zone. By G.O.Rt.No.2424 Home (Police.C) Department dated 25-11-1998 both the petitioners were repatriated back to their parent ranges. However, they were continuing by virtue of the orders passed by this Court in W.P. No.32683 of 1998 directing to maintain status quo pending disposal of O.A.No.7579 of 1998. The O.A. was, however, disposed of as covered by the Full bench Judgement of the Tribunal dated 20-10-1994. The petitioners challenged the same in W.P.No.5613 of 1999 wherein this Court directed to maintain status quo on 19-03-1999. The Writ Petition was finally disposed of on 30-01-2001 remanding the matter to the Tribunal for fresh disposal and directed to maintain status quo till the disposal of the O.A.
The petitioner in W.P.No.13558 of 2001 was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police in Zone IV in 1976 and promoted as Inspector of Police in 1982. By order dated
29-03-1995 of the Inspector General of Police (Admn.) he was transferred to Hyderabad City on administrative grounds and in public interest and the order mention that his seniority will be reckoned in Hyderabad city. By the order dated 25-11-1998 he was repatriated back to his parent zone.
The petitioner in W.P.No.15101 of 2001 arising out of O.A.No.8534 of 1998 was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police on 21-04-1974 in Zone IV and later promoted as Inspector of Police in 1982. He was transferred from Zone-IV to Zone II by proceedings dated 02-04-1997. By the impugned orders he was repatriated back to his parent range.
The petitioner (K.Ashok Reddy) in W.P.No.13545 arising out O.A.No.8430 of 1998 was appointed as Sub-Inspector of police in Zone V in 1978 and promoted as Inspector of Police on out of seniority in February, 1987 and on regular basis in June, 1991. By the proceedings dated 12-02-1996 he was transferred to Hyderabad Range and at the relevant time he was working as Inspector of Police, Saroornagar. He was one of the persons repatriated through G.O.Rt.No.2424. He obtained orders of status quo in O.A.No.8438 of 1998. When the Deputy Inspector General of Police issued the consequential proceedings dated 04-01-2001 he filed O.A.No.58 of 2001 and the Tribunal by orders dated 09-01-2001 granted interim suspension of the said orders. The said O.A. was also tagged on O.A.No.8430 of 2001.
The petitioner in W.P.No.13458 of 2001 (G. Anantha Reddy) arising out of O.A. No.2139 of 2001 was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police in Zone VI on 01-02-1974 and promoted as Inspector of Police on 18-07-1988. He is not aggrieved by the orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.349 or G.O.Rt.No.2424. His grievance is that though by orders dated 04-01-2001 he was posted as Inspector of Police, Saroornagar
he was not permitted to join duty. It appears that there was a dispute between the petitioner in W.P.No.13545 of 2001 and this petitioner as to the holding of the post of Inspector of Police, Saroornagar P.S. Pursuant to an order passed in C.A.No.1881 of 2001 the petitioner in W.P.No.13545 of 2001 was issued posting orders on 03-04-2001 at Saroornagar and the petitioner herein was kept under reserve for want of vacancy from 01-08-2001. He challenged the same in O.A.No.2139 of 2001. The O.A. was tagged on to O.A.No.8430 of 1998 and O.A.No.58 of 2001. These three OAs were dismissed. The Tribunal observed that both the petitioners continued vexatious litigation with the predominant motive of occupying the post of Inspector Police, Saroornagar P.S. and therefore it was not desirable to allow either of them as Inspector of Police, Saroornagar PS in public interest. Being aggrieved, he filed the present Writ Petition. According to him, he was still kept on waiting for posting and he is not being paid salary from 03-04-2001.
Aggrieved by the observations of the Tribunal in O.A.No.2139 of 2001 as against the petitioner Sri Ashok Reddy, he filed W.P.No.19341 of 2001. He also filed W.P.No.19375 of 2001 challenging the proceedings dated 04-01-2001 of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Hyderabad Range referred to above repatriating him back to his parent zone.
The Tribunal by the order under challenge held that the transfer of the petitioners to Hyderabad city is on temporary basis and they cannot claim permanent absorption in the unit to which they were transferred. Rejecting the contention of the petitioners that the Judgement of the Full Bench of the Tribunal is not binding on them, the Tribunal held that the Judgement of the Full Bench in O.A.Nos.22622 of 1990 to 22635 of 1990 is a judgement in rem and not judgement in personam. It was also held that the seniority of the petitioners was being maintained in their respective police ranges only and not in Hyderabad City Police. It was further held that Hyderabad City Police is not part and parcel of Zone VI and is a free zone and separate independent recruitment is being made in respect of posts of Hyderabad City Police. As regards the issue of not repatriating similarly placed persons, it was found that such persons will be considered soon after disposal of pending oral enquiries/ACB cases registered against them. The Tribunal also held that the petitioners were appointed and promoted in their parent zones and therefore they cannot have a right to be treated as regular candidates of Hyderabad City Police. The Tribunal also held that the Tribunal in the Full Bench Judgement while upholding the Rules read down the same instead of striking down them and the G.O.Ms.No.349 has been issued only by way of clarification to G.O.Ms.No.288. Holding so, the Tribunal dismissed all the applications.
Being aggrieved, the present Writ petitions were filed.
The petitioner in W.P.No.13458 of 2001 is not concerned with the transfer from one zone to another. Expect the petitioner in W.P.No.15372 of 2001, the other petitioners were transferred to Hyderabad City Police from other zones. The Petitioner in W.P.No.15372 of 2001 was transferred from Zone IV to II and was repatriated back to Zone IV pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.349.
SUBMISSIONS:
Mr. Nuty Rammohan Rao, learned counsel appearing for one of the petitioners would submit that the learned Tribunal erred in not considering the legality and validity of the policy decision of the State contained in G.O.Ms.No.349 and G.O.Rt.No.2424. He would further submit that in terms of Para 3(6) of the Presidential Order no separate cadre has been organised for the City of Hyderabad and, therefore, the State was competent to make provision for effecting transfer from one local cadre to another local cadre in terms of Para 5(2)(c) of the Presidential Order. The Tribunal in the Full Bench judgement upheld the validity of the Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.288 and once an employee is transferred from one local cadre to another in public interest and on administrative grounds, they cannot be repatriated back. Rule 3 of the Rules is in conformity with the provisions contained in Para 5(1) of the Presidential Order.
Sri P.V. Krishnaiah, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were transferred to Hyderabad City Police on permanent basis and, therefore, they cannot be repatriated back to their parent zones. The Full Bench judgement of the Tribunal does not come in the way of the petitioners being transferred to Hyderabad City Police and G.O.Ms.No.349 is contrary to the power vested on the State to effect transfers under Para 5(2) of the Presidential Order and the rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.288 are in accordance with Para 5(2). Insofar as Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors of Police are concerned, there is no separate zone for Hyderabad City and it is included in Zone VI only and as such inter-cadre transfers is permissible. It was further submitted that all the posts in the Police Department are covered by the A.P. Police Subordinate Service Rules issued in exercise of the power under Article 309 of the Constitution and no separate recruitment is being made under the provisions of the Hyderabad City Police Act. The Full Bench was not correct in holding that Hyderabad City is a separate Unit. Nobody was appointed under the Hyderabad City Police Act. Learned counsel would further submit that G.O.Ms.No.349 would operate only prospectively but not retrospectively.
The learned Additional Advocate-General would contend that Government under Para 5(2) is empowered to make transfers in certain specified circumstances mentioned in Clauses (a) to (d). In the Full Bench Judgement, the Tribunal read down the Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.288 to the extent the posts of Police Officers under Para 14(f) are exempted. He would further urge that G.O.Ms.No.349 has been issued only by way of clarification to G.O.Ms.No.288 dated 06-05-1986.
FINDINGS:
Section 3 of the Act 1985 begins with a non-obstante provision and renders liable a member of the Police Force to serve in any part of the State of Andhra Pradesh. Sec.2(b) of this Act defines a Police Force to mean the Police Force constituted under the Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 Fasli; the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) District Police Act 1859 and Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) District Police Act 1329 Fasli or any other law relating to the Police Force.
On a linguistic construction of the expressed terms of the Act 1985, there are no apparent limits to the transferability of a member of the Police Force within the territory of the State of Andhra Pradesh.
Having regard to the provisions of Presidential Order 1975 made under Art. 371D of the Constitution, local cadres have been constituted and Para 5 (1) of the Presidential Order which mandates that each part of the State, for which a local cadre has been organised in respect of any category of posts, shall be a separate unit for the purpose, inter alia, of transfer. Having regard to the provisions of Art. 371D(10) the Presidential Order prevails over any provision of the Constitution or any other law for the time being in force. In this constitutional position, while the provisions of the Act 1985 are plenary within that sphere would nevertheless require to be construed in harmony with the provisions of the Presidential Order. The liability of a member of the police force to be transferred to any part of the State and the concomitant power of the State Government to so effect a transfer is thus subject to the limitations enjoined in the Presidential Order.
The doctrine of reading down of a statute is a well recognised principle of statutory construction. This doctrine is used either for saving a statute from being struck down on account of unconstitutionality, resulting either from the incompetence of a Legislature to enact a statute or from its violation of any of the provisions of the Constitution. Thus wherever the provisions of the statute are vague, ambiguous or couched in broad phraseology and two interpretations are possible on its terms – one which renders the provisions constitutional and the other unconstitutional, a limiting construction can be employed to structure the provisions of the statute, so as to bring them in conformity with the constitution and thus rendering them intra vires – vide
In Re the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property Act, 1937 and the Hindu Women’s Rights to Property (Amendment) Act, 1938 (AIR 1941 FC 72); Nalinakhya Bysack vs Shyam Sunder Hakdar (AIR 1953 SC 148); R M D Chamarbaugwalla vs Union of India (AIR 1957 SC 628); Kedar Nath Singh vs State of Bihar (AIR 1962 SC 955); R.L. Arora vs State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1964 SC 1230); Jagadish Pandey vs the Chancellor, University of Bihar, (AIR 1968 SC353); Umed vs Raj Singh (AIR 1975 SC 43); Sunil Batra vs Delhi Administration (AIR 1978 SC1675) ; Excel Works vs Union of India (AIR 1979 SC 25) and Minerva Mills Ltd., vs Union of India (AIR 1980 SC 1789).
In VIJAYALAKSHAMMA v B.T. SHANKAR1 the Apex Court has pointed out that the Courts may not add or alter provisions of statute by reading into them what was never intended by the legislature or may have been deliberately avoided by it. (Also See GM SC RAILWAY, SEC’BAD v SRI RAMA ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTIONS, 2001 (6) ALD 191).
The alleged uncanalised grant of power to transfer a member of the Police Force to any part of the State of Andhra Pradesh, under the Act, 1985, must thus on principle and authority, be read as empowering transfer only in conformity with the provisions of the Presidential Order in particular Para 5 thereof.
An analysis of the provisions of the Presidential Order 1975, discloses that an elaborate framework for organisation of local cadres for parts of the State has been made both for the purposes of fitment of the existing employees as well as those to be recruited in future, as also for transfer, seniority and promotional avenues, which are either localised or State-wide, as the case may be. This is apparent from Paras 3 and 6 of the Presidential Order. Para 4 of the Presidential Order lays down the principles that should govern the allotment of persons to local cadres which are specified in Para 4(2) (a) to (e). Para 4(4) and 4(5) enable consideration of grievances with regard to allotment and rectification of the same, wherever found necessary and warranted. Para 4(6) enacts finality to any order of the State Government made on any representation setting out grievances with regard to allotment, subject, however, to adjudication of such dispute by the Administrative Tribunal constituted for the State of Andhra Pradesh under Art. 371D (3) of the Constitution.
Para 14 of the Presidential Order saves posts in specified departments, establishments or institutions from the provisions of the Presidential Order, which includes any post of Police Officer as defined in Cl.(b) of Sec. 3 of the Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 Fasli. The posts in institutions, departments or establishments set out in Para 14 of the Presidential Order are thus outside the ambit of the provisions of the Presidential Order. Para 11 enacts an over riding effect to the provisions of the Presidential Order over any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation or other order made before or after the commencement of the Presidential Order.
Para 5 specifies that each part of the State for which a local cadre has been organised in respect of any category of posts shall be a separate unit for the purpose of recruitment, appointment, discharge, seniority, promotion and transfer and such other matters as may be specified by the State Government, in respect of that category of posts.
On an analysis of the provisions of the Presidential Order and in particular those adumbrated above, it is clear that having regard to the historical compulsions which have led to the enactment of Art.371D, the Presidential Order provides the framework for intra State compartmentalisation of certain posts under the rubric of local cadres, constituted for parts of the State and protects the service conditions of members allotted or recruited to such local cadres in respect of matters specified in Para 5(1). The local cadres are thus the result of the historical compulsions engendered by economic and other differentia operating between parts of the State of Andhra Pradesh and of the felt grievances of residents of such parts of the State.
In construing the power granted to the State Government under Para 5(2) for making provisions for transfers of persons, we must not loose sight of the historical compulsions which have led to the enactment of the Presidential Order, which is butteressed by the over riding effect given to the provisions of the Presidential Order not only against the exercise of the majoritarian, political and executive choices of the State, but is also made operative against any other provisions of the Constitution of India (Art.371D(10) read with Para 11 of the Presidential Order).
It is not in dispute that in terms of Section 3 of the Act, 1985, the State Government may transfer a member of the police force from one place to another within the State. It is also not in dispute that the rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.288 dated 06-05-1986 provide for transfer of members of the police force.
What was questioned before the Tribunal is the validity or otherwise of Rule 3 of the said rules. The vires of Rule 3 aforementioned has been questioned inter alia on the ground that no guideline has been provided therein and thereby an unbridled and uncanalised power has been conferred.
The said rules apply to every member of police force from the rank of police constables to the rank of Inspector and were of equivalent ranks working in District Armed Forces (DAR) etc. The applicability of the rule therefore is limited to the officers specified therein. By reason of Rule 2 no power has been delegated but mere competency of the concerned officers had been provided. Rule 3 protects seniority. Such seniority is required to be protected having regard to the provisions contained in the Presidential Order. The salutary principle underlying the framing of Rule 3 is the administrative ground and public interest.
What is an administrative ground and what would be an action in public interest although may vary from case to case, but the power of judicial review against an order of transfer is not excluded. The Court exercising its power of judicial review can always interfere in the event a transfer has not been made on administrative ground or in public interest.
Non-availability of competent officer and public interest are themselves provide for adequate guidelines. Furthermore, in a case where an action is contrary to the principle enunciated in the Presidential Order, a judicial review would lie and thus it cannot be said that Rule 3 is ultra vires Article 14 or 246 of the Constitution of India.
However, there cannot be any dispute that Clause (10) of Article 371-D of the Constitution of India will have primacy.
We may notice that no separate organisation has come into being in terms of Para 3(1) of the Presidential Order. Para 3(3) of the said order refers to the zonal posts. Para 3(5) apply to both gazetted and non-gazetted posts. Although a power has been conferred in Para 3(6) to create a separate cadre of posts which has to be organised for the city of Hyderabad, no such cadre has come into being. Further, in terms of notification issued by the Central Government in G.S.R.No.528 (E) dated 18-10-1975, the Police Department is not part of the said notification for the purposes of organisation of a separate cadre for the city of Hyderabad. Para 3(5) will have application only in relation to the said local cadres, which have been organised in respect of any category of posts. Such local cadre would be a separate unit inter alia for the purposes of recruitment, appointment, discharge, seniority, promotion and transfer.
Para 5(2) provides the repository of the power. Para 5(2) (a) has no application in the instant case.
The State Government has made provisions for transfer of a person from a local cadre to another local cadre where no qualified or suitable persons is available in the latter cadre or where such transfer is otherwise considered necessary in the public interest. The power of the State Government is therefore limited. The said power can be exercised only in the event the conditions precedent therefore are satisfied.
In terms of the II Schedule there are only six zones. The city of Hyderabad comes within the purview of Zone-VI. The city of Hyderabad, although loosely treated as a separate zone, but no such separate zone has been created. The city of Hyderabad therefore comes within the purview of Zone VI only.
A transfer from one cadre to another cadre has to be made keeping in view the various contingencies viz., a) having regard to the public interest and permanent in nature; b) it is transient in nature; c) temporary and d) shifting the cadre.
Seniority of the person concerned was therefore required to be protected, having regard to the fact that even if a transfer from one cadre to another is temporary, a situation may arise where the question of his promotion may come up. Unless appropriate safeguard is made, as regards seniority of a person transferred, he may not be considered for promotion at all.
Having regard to Para 5(2) (c) of the Order, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the State has the requisite power to make transfers in public interest. As there does not exist any Hyderabad zone, Para 5(2) (a) would not come into play at all.
Transfer under general law is an incidence of service, but having regard to the peculiar situation obtaining in the State of Andhra Pradesh and in particular having regard to the Presidential Order, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that a person cannot be transferred from one cadre to another cadre in a normal situation. An order of transfer would be permissible only when the condition precedent therefor exists.
In each case, the State is required to apply its mind and come to a conclusion as to whether an order of transfer should be passed, having regard to non-availability of a suitable person or in public interest. Non-availability of a suitable person may be temporary nature. As and when a suitable person is found out, a person belonging to the local cadre may replace a transferee.
If for the aforementioned purpose, a policy decision has been taken by the State that no permanent transfer shall be made, the same cannot be found fault with.
Insofar as public interest is concerned, transfer from one cadre to another cadre is permissible. Such public interest may either be temporary or permanent in nature.
In a case where an order of transfer is required by way of temporary measure, the officer concerned should be transferred back to his parent zone. However, there may be some exceptional circumstances where transfer of a person on permanent basis from one cadre to another cadre may have to be affected. Situations may vary from circumstances to circumstances. As for example, when grave law and order problem arises in one part of the State, transfer from one cadre to another cadre with a view to meet the exigency of the situation is not prohibited. Further more, when the services of a particular officer may become necessary, having regard to his expertise or experience in dealing with the similar matters, public interest may demand of his services be requisitioned. But, inter cadre transfer should be made in exceptional situations. It is now a common knowledge that entire cadre transfer is sought for and is made for extraneous considerations having regard to the chances of promotion better amenities and other factors. In a case of such nature, the orders of transfer cannot be passed and having regard to the scheme of the Presidential Order vis-à-vis the said Act and the
Rules, such orders of the transfer can be interfered with by the Tribunal or by this Court.
In S.PRAKASHA RAO v CCT1 the apex Court clearly held that the State Government has no blanket power to create local cadres, as the same would tend to defeat the object of Article 371-D and the Presidential Order. As regards organisation of a separate cadre is concerned, having regard to the language used in Para 3(7), it was held that the same may be given effect to.
(1 AIR 1990 (2) SCC 259)
But, as noticed hereinbefore, no separate cadre has been created in respect of the police force so far as Hyderabad is concerned and thus the city of Hyderabad is comprised in Zone VI. As further noticed hereinbefore, no person has been appointed strictly in terms of the Hyderabad City Police Act and thus even the provisions contained in Para 14 (f) will have no application.
In GOVT. OF A.P. v A.SURYANARAYANA RAO2 the apex Court held
Para 5 of the Presidential Order is also to the same effect. When once each zone is treated as a separate unit for the purpose of promotion also in respect of zonal posts than by virtue of Article 371-D and the Presidential Order. As observed above, the promotion from the post of Junior Engineer to the post of Assistant Engineer which are both zonal posts, should be on the basis of the zonal seniority list inasmuch as the post of Junior Engineer and the next promotion post namely Assistant Engineer are included in the local cadre and the zonal list as we find in the Third Schedule. With regards the higher posts which are not included in the local cadre and which are Statewide posts, it becomes obvious that the Statewide seniority list of the Assistant Engineers of all zones should beprepared and that should be the basis of promotion to the post of Executive Engineer which is not a zonal post.
The apex Court reiterated the dicta in S.PRAKASH RAO (1 Supra) and held that the zonal seniority list prepared pursuant to the initial organisation and creation of local cadres has to be maintained.
A similar question came up for consideration recently in GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH V.MOHD.GHOUSE MOHINUDDIN & ORS3 and therein the earlier decisions of the apex Court in S.PRAKASH RAO (1 supra) and SURYANARAYANA RAO (2 Supra) were upheld. In the aforementioned decision, the apex Court also held:
(2 AIR 1991 S.C 2113) (3 OT 2001 (7) S.C 146)
5. A combined reading of Paragraph 3 (i) and 3(7), therefore makes it clear that within 18 months from the commencement of the Presidential Order, the State Government could organise classes of posts in the Civil Services of the State into different local cadres for the purpose of achieving the main objective of the Presidential Order, and such organised local cadre, would be the area of operation for considering the question of recruitment, promotion etc. this being the position, the Tribunal committed error by holding that Paragraph 3(3) of the Presidential Order would have an over-riding effect.
The apex Court upon analysing the provisions of Article 371-D vis-à-vis the Presidential Order held that Para 3 (7) would have an over riding effect upon Para 3 (3).
Understood in the context of its evolutional history, the power conferred on the State Government under Para 5 (2) must necessarily be interpreted as a power to make a provision for transfers for exceptional reasons, which will have to be such as to warrant a departure from the framework of local cadres carefully structured under the provisions of the Presidential Order. If the expression “nothing in this order shall prevent the State Government” from making provisions for transfers (Para 5(2)) is to be given its ordinary, natural and grammatical construction, the entire scheme of the Presidential Order including the immunity provided to such order from the legislative and executive power of the State would be rendered nugatory and illusory. After a local cadre is organised and allotments/direct recruitment made to such local cadres, the State would be free to make provisions for transfers, totally disrupting the harmony of local cadres so achieved, by the devise of free transferability and that cellular discipline of local cadres could be totally subverted. Such irrationality cannot be imputed to the Presidential Order.
On the above analysis we hold that the power of the State Government to make a provision for transfer in any of the circumstances and exigencies set out in sub-Paras (a) to (c) of Para 5(2) is a power circumscribed by the limitation that such transfers are to be only in exceptional circumstances, in exigencies of over riding public interest or where no qualified or suitable person is available in a particular local cadre and predominantly only for a transient period for which such contingency exists, an exception being the circumstance enumerated in Para 5(2)(d) namely reciprocal basis.
To maintain the sanctity of the local cadre discipline in particular is set out in the provisions of Para 5(1), we also hold that while effecting any transfers by virtue of a provisions made by the State Government under Para 5(2). Clear and specific reasons must be recorded justifying such transfer within the contours of Para 5(2)(a) to (d). Such recording of reasons is essential to enable conformity of the State’s power to transfer with the provisions of the Presidential Order. Such recording of reasons would facilitate and ensure the exercise of power of transfer within the confined and limited contours available to the State.
Having regard to the provisions of Para 14 of the Presidential Order, no limitations are prescribed on the power of the State Government to provide for transfer of the incumbent of a post in any department, institution or establishment enumerated in
Para 14 to another such department, institution or establishment.
In so far as transfers of persons falling within the ambit of Para 5(2)(a) to (c) is concerned, provisions of the Act 1985 and the rules thereunder set out in
G.O. Ms.No. 288 dt 6.5.1986, must be construed as enabling such transfers only when no qualified or suitable person is available in a particular local cadre or where such transfer is otherwise considered necessary in the public interest and for no other reason. Normally such transfers must necessarily be of limited duration or tenure to meet the specified exigency namely either during the period no qualified or suitable person is available or the public interest that necessitated such transfer, continues. Immediately on cessation of such circumstances – as and when a qualified or suitable person is available or when the public interest concerned ceases to operate, the persons so transferred in the above exigencies must need be repatriated to the local cadre to which he belongs either by allotment or direct recruitment to it. There may be very rare circumstances, and very rare they must necessarily be, where a persons is required to be transferred to another local cadre on a longer term basis. Clear reasons for such long term transfer must not only exist but must be clearly recorded. In any case wherever such transfer, be it for a short term or longer term, the transfers made in the circumstances set out in Para 5(2)(a) to (c) being on administrative exigencies, must enable the person so transferred to carry the benefit of his seniority to the transferred local cadre. To this extent Rule 3 of the Rules made under the Act 1985 must be held to be valid.
In the case of a transfer on reciprocal basis, Para 5(2)(d) itself mandates that the person transferred shall be assigned seniority in the later cadre with effect from the date of his transfer to such cadre. Rule 3 of the Rules made under the Act 1985 would have no application in such a case and the provisions of Para 5(2)(d) would operate. We are of the opinion that even in respect of a transfer under Para 5(2)(d) the principles/guidelines for allotment in Para 4(2) should be borne in mind and reciprocal transfers should not be freely approved which would gravely disrupt the need for composition of balance cadre having regard to age and seniority or the administrative needs of the posts in the local cadre.
Nothing has been placed before this court to demonstrate that any appointments of police officers have been made only under the provisions of either the Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 Fasli but they have been made also under the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) District Police Act 1859 or the Andhra Pradesh (Telengana Area) District Police Act 1349 Fasli. All appointments have been made under the relevant Rules made under proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution including the Andhra Pradesh Police Service Rules; Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Rules; Andhra Pradesh police (Armed Reserve) Service Rules; Andhra Pradesh (Communications) Subordinate Service Rules; Andhra Pradesh Police (Computer Centre) Service Rules and the Andhra Pradesh Police (Computer Centre) Subordinate Service Rules, etc.
Sec.2(b) of Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 Fasli defines a Police Officer to include every member of the City Police Force appointed under this Act as also the Commissioner of City Police, Hyderabad, the Deputy or Assistant Commissioner of Police and subject to provisions of sub-sec.(2) of Sec. 9 and sub-Sec.(2) of Sec.10 every person who has been appointed as an Additional or Special Police Officer. Sec.7 of this Act vests in the Commissioner of City Police the power to appoint and promote Inspector of Police, Sub Inspector of Police and other subordinates of the force and empowers the Government to appoint the Deputy Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of Police. Sections 9 and 10 provide the power to appoint Additional Police Officer and Special Police respectively. No Police Officer has been appointed under the provisions of this Act. All recruitments are notified and appointments made under the Special Rules made under the proviso to Art 309 of the Constitution. Thus, though the post of a Police Officer as defined in Sec.3(b) of the Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 Fasli is beyond the purview of the Presidential Order in view of Para 14 of the said Order, there is in fact no Police Officer as defined in Sec.3(b) of the Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 Fasli, factually in existence.
As there has been no constitution of a separate cadre for the city of Hyderabad for members of the Police Force in terms of Para 3(6) of the Presidential Order, members of the police force allotted or recruited to Hyderabad must be construed as having been so allotted or recruited to either the District cadre of Hyderabad or zonal cadre of Zone VI viz Hyderabad , Nizamabad, Mahabubnagar, Medak and Nalgonda Districts, as the case may be, depending upon the rank they hold, whether it is a District cadre post or a Zonal cadre post.
The post of an Inspector of Police in the Police department having been specified as item 51 of the 3rd Schedule and being a specified gazetted category in terms of Para 2 (1) (i) read with 3(4) of the Presidential Order and being required therefore, to be organised into a zonal cadre of Inspector of Police including those working for the nonce as part of the Hyderabad city police, have to be considered as members of Zone VI which includes the District of Hyderabad. They do not fall within the provisions of Para 14 of the Presidential Order. The transfers from and to the establishments and units of Hyderabad City Police therefore fall within the parameters of Para 5(2)(c) to (d). A person once allotted to one zone and attached to his post must be said to be belonging to the same zone and he has no right to come to any other cadre, which is not organised one.
To the aforementioned extent, the Full bench decision of the Tribunal in O.A.Nos.22622 to 635 must be held to have not been rendered correctly.
CONCLUSIONS:
(a) Transfers from and to the departments, institutions/establishments specified in Para 14 of the Presidential Order are outside the limitations of the Presidential Order.
(b) No separate cadre has been organised for the City of Hyderabad within the meaning of Para 3(6) of the Presidential Order.
(c) No recruitment to the post of a police officer as defined in Sec.3(b) of Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 Fasli has been made and there is thus factually no incumbent of the post of a police officer under Para 14(f) of the Presidential Order.
(d) Inspectors of Police working in the Hyderabad City Police establishments either on promotion to that post or by direct recruitment, must be considered as belonging to Zone VI in the zonal cadre.
(e) The provisions of Sec.3 of the Act 1985 imposing a liability on a member of the police force to serve in any part of the State of Andhra Pradesh and the concomitant power of the State Government to effect such transfer has to be in conformity with the provisions of Para 5(2) of the Presidential Order in view of the provisions of Art.371D(10) of the Constitution and Para 11 of the Presidential Order.
(f) Transfer of a member of the police force from any local cadre to any office or establishment under Para 14 or vice versa, the transfer of a person from any local cadre comprising posts in any office or establishment exercising territorial jurisdiction over a part of the State to another local cadre comprising posts of such part or vice versa and the transfer of a person from one local cadre to another local cadre could be effected only where no qualified or suitable person is available in such later cadre or where such transfer is otherwise considered necessary in the public interest and not otherwise. Wherever such transfers are made on the ground of public interest, such public interest must be of such overriding impact as to warrant a departure from the local cadre discipline set out in paras 3,4, 5(i) and 6 of the Presidential Order.
(g) While effecting such transfer, reasons must be recorded justifying such transfers either on the ground of there being no qualified or suitable person available in the cadre to which transfer is to be effected or on the ground of overriding public interest.
(h) Such transfers are normally to be of limited duration or tenure coterminus with the specified exigency for which the transfer is made and shall cease to be operative and the incumbent transferred liable to be reverted to the parent cadre immediately on the cessation of such exigency, which warranted the transfer.
(i) Transfer on long-term basis or of indeterminate duration should be in the rarest of circumstances, again for clearly specified reasons and there should be a periodical review of the need for continuance of the person so transferred in the transferred local cadre.
(j) In all cases of transfer made in the circumstances set out in Para 5(2)(a) to (c) and on the principles aforestated, the persons so transferred is entitled to his seniority in the unit to which he is transferred. Rule 3 of the Rules under the Act 1985 is valid.
(k) In the case of transfers on reciprocal basis, the seniority of persons transferred shall be in accordance with the prescriptions of Para 5(2)(d). Rule 3 of the Rules under the Act, 1985 is in such cases inoperative.
(l) Even in case of transfers on reciprocal basis, due regard must be had to the principles of maintenance of composition of balance local cadre with reference to age and seniority groups, the administrative needs of the posts in the local cadres and the like as set out in Para 4 (2) of the Presidential Order.
(m) Rule 3 of the Rules made under the provisions of the Act 1985 is operative to the extent it is in conformity with the principles set out in paras (J) and (K) above.
Before parting with this case, we may notice that various other findings of the learned Tribunal had been questioned by the learned counsel for the parties on several grounds, but having regard to the fact that the questions raised in the respective O.As are required to be considered afresh, as at present advised, we do not intend to enter into the said questions.
Having answered the reference as above, resolution of the individual cases is relegated to the Division Bench to be decided on merits of each of the writ petitions.
Sd/-
P.Ekambaram,
Asst.Registrar
Sd/-
Section Officer.
// true copy //
* * *
PLEASE SEE THE STATEMENT PERTAINING TO ANNEXURE NO. 3 IN THE XLS FORMAT AT THE END OF THE REPORT
Annexure-4
LIST OF POSTS KEPT OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THE ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
1. Assistant Secretary to Government in A.P. General Service.
2. L.D.Cs in the Persian Research Section of the State Archieves.
3. Deputy Secretary to the Governor of A.P. was excluded from the purview of the Commission.
4. Posts of Social Workers (now Craft Instructress) and games Supervisors in A.P. General Subordinate Service.
5. Superintendents, State Home for Women (Gazetted), Women’s Welfare Department.
6. Gazetted District Women’s Welfare Officers in Women’s Welfare Department.
7. Stewards and Assistant Stewards, Cash Keepers.
8. Librarians and Assistant Librarians.
9. Lower Division Clerks in all Offices except in the Office of the Heads of Departments and Secretariat Department.
10. Linen Keepers.
11. Laundry Supervisors
12. Security Clerks and Typists of L.D. Cadre in all Offices except in the Offices of Heads of Departments and Secretariat Department.
13. Ministerial posts of Superintendent and Offices Assistants in the Records Office, Non-Indian State Forces, Hyderabad
14. Office in charge Records Office, Non Indian State Forces, Hyderabad
15. Statistical Assistants in A.P. Marketing Subordinate Service.
16. Non-cadre Deputy Secretaries, to Government in Finance Planning (F.W) have been kept out side the purview of the Commission.
17. Dental Assistant Surgeons.
18. School Assistants in Panchayat Raj Institutions.
19. Extension Officers (Panchayats).
20. Steno-Typist in A.P. Lokayukta and Upa-Lokayukta.
21. In Public Enterprises Management Board and Horticultural Officers vide G.O.Ms.No.582, G.A.(Ser.A) Dept., dt. 12-12-1985.
22. Vide G.O.Ms.No.46, G.A.(Ser.A) Department, dated 20-02-1986 appointment of meritorious Sportsman to the post of A.S.O./Typist-cum-Assistant and Junior Stenographers in the Departments of Secretariat and Senior Assistant, Junior Assistant, Typists and Junior Stenos in Heads of Departments.
23. Junior Medical Officers in Indian Medicine and Homeopathy Department vide G.O.Ms.No.615, G.A.(Ser.A) Department, dated 13-11-1990.
24. Posts indicated in U.O.Note No.560/SES/-1/A1/92, dated 08-02-1993 of Employment Generation and Youth Services (SES-I) Department.
25. Excise Inspector – Excise Department vide G.O.Ms.No.453, Revenue Department, dated 30-05-1997.
26. Manager Guest House in Government House Department, vide G.O.Ms.No.466, G.A.D. dated 28-09-1997.
27. School Assistants in A.P. Educational Subordinate Service
vide G.O.Ms.No.226, G.A.(Ser.A) Department., dated 01-07-2000.
* * *
THE FOLLOWING RECRUITMENTS WITHDRAWN FROM THE PURVIEW OF THE ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION.
1. Sub-Inspector of Police (Civil) in Police Department. G.O.Ms.No.202, Home (Pol. C) Dept. dt. 02-04-1985.
2. Group-IV Services (District Posts) G.O.Ms.No.259, G.A. (Ser.A) Dept. dt.04-06-1985 G.O.Ms.No.260 G.A. (Ser.A) Dept. dt. 05-06-1985.
3. Civil Assistant Surgeons in A.P.Medical & Health Service G.O.Ms.No.441, M & H Dept. dt. 05-07-1986.
4. Veterinary Assistant Surgeons in Animal Husbandry Dept. G.O.Ms.No.74, Food & Agril. Dept. dt.05-021988.
5. Agricultural Officers/ Horticulture Officers G.O.Ms.No.148, Food & Agril. Dept. dt.15-03-1989.
6. School assistants in Panchayat Raj Institutions in A.P. Educational Sub-Service G.O.Ms.No.299 G.A. (Ser.A) Dept. dt. 02-06-1989.
7. Junior Medical Officers in Indian Medicine & Homeopathy Dept. G.O.Ms.No.615, G.A. (Ser.A) Dept. dt. 13-11-1990.
8. Medical officers in Indian Medicine & Homeopathy Dept. G.O.Ms.No.17, M & H & FW Dept. dt. 10-011992.
9. District Munsiffs in A.P. State Judicial Service, G.O.Ms.No.124, Law Dept. dt. 05-08-1996.
10. Excise Inspectors in A.P. Excise Service, G.O.Ms.No.453, Revenue ( Excise) Dept. dt. 30-051997.
11. Manager ( Guest House) in Govt. House Dept., G.O.Ms.No.466, G.A. Dept. dt. 28-09-1997.
12. Tutors. Assuistant Professors ( Clinical/non-Clinical) in A.P. Medical & Health Service, G.O.Ms.No.80 G.A. (Ser.A) Dept. dt. 07-03-1998.
13. Immunologists in Medical Department.
14. Gramodaya Officers.
15. School Assistants in A.P. Educational Sub-Service, G.O.Ms.No.226, G.A. (Ser.A) Dept. dt.01-07-2000.
16. G.O.Ms.No.70 Law (L.A & J Courts-D1) Dept. dt.18-05-2002 (Jr. Assts, Typists and Steno-Typists in A.P. Judicial/Ministerial Services).
*****
Annexure - 5
LIST OF POSTS IN GROUP-IV SERVICES (OTHER THAN POSTS IN THE HEADS OF DEPARTMENTS, SECRETARIAT DEPARTMENTS AND THE ANDHRA PRADESH JUDICIAL MINISTERIAL SERVICES) IN SUBORDINATE OFFICES UNDER THE PURVIEW OF DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEES.
* * *
1. Junior Assistants, Junior Auditors, Junior / L.D. Accountants in all offices.
2. Typists and Junior Stenographers of L.D. Cadre in all offices.
3. Security Clerks.
4. Librarians and Assistant Librarians.
5. Cash Keepers.
6. Stewards
7. Assistant Stewards
8. Linen Keepers.
9. Laundry Supervisors.
and
10. The posts of the School Assistants in Panchayat Raj Institutions and the A.P.Educational Sub-Service.
* * *
Annexure - 6
ATTESTATION FORM
ANDHRA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
1. Name in Full (in Block Capitals)
With aliases, if any
(Please indicate if you have added or dropped at any
stage, any part of your name or surname)
Surname
Name
2. Present Address in Full
(i.e. Village, Thana and District or House Number, Lane / Street and Road, Pin Code No.)
3. (a) Home Address in Full
(i.e. Village, Thana and District or House Number,
Lane/Street and Road, Pin Code No.)
(b) If Originally a resident of Pakistan, the Address in
that Dominion and the date of migration to Indian
Union,
4. Particulars of places where you have resident for more than one year during the preceding five years.
From To
Residential Address in Full (i.e. Village, Thana and District or House Number, Lane/Street and Road.)
5. (a) Father’s Name in full with aliases, if any ; (a)
(b) Present Postal Address (if dead, give last Address) (b)
(c) Permanent Home Address : (c)
(d) Profession : (d)
(e) If in service, give designation and official Address (e)
6. (i) Nationality of :
(a) Father (a)
(b) Mother (b)
(c) Husband (c)
(d) Wife (d)
(ii) Place of Birth :
(a) Husband (a)
(b) Wife (b)
7. (a) Exact date of Birth (a)
(b) Present Age (b)
(c) Age at Matriculation (c)
8. (a) Place of Birth, District and State in which it is
situated.
(b) District and State to which you belong. (a)
(b)
9. (a) State Your Religion.
(b) “Are you a member of Scheduled Caste, Scheduled
Tribe or Backward Class? Answer ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ and
if the answer is ‘Yes’ please specify the exact Class/
Tribe/Gr.A,B,C,D”. (a)
(b)
10. Educational qualifications showing places of education with year in Schools and Colleges since 15th year of age.
Name of School / College with full Address Date of entering Date of leaving Examination Passed
11. If you have, at any time been employed, give details :
Designation of post held or description of work
Period Full address of the office, Firm or Institution
From
To
12. Have you ever been arrested by the police, convicted
by a court or detained on any offence.
Note : If detained, arrested, convicted debarred etc. sub-sequent to the completion and submission of this form, the details should be communicated immediately to the A.P.P.S.C. or the authority to whom the attestation form has been sent earlier, as the case may be, failing which it will be deemed to be a suppression of factual information. If the answer is ‘Yes’ the full particulars of the conviction and sentences should be given.
13. Names of two responsible persons of your locality or
two references to whom you are known. 1.
2.
14. Have you ever been member / worker of any Political
Party or Communal organisation and if so, furnish details
DECLARATION SHOULD BE SIGNED BY THE CANDIDATE
1. I hereby declare that the statements made in this form are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.
2. I am married / unmarried and have only one wife living.
(delete which is not applicable)
3. I am fully aware that furnishing of false information or suppression of any factual information in the attestation form would be a disqualification and is likely to render me unfit for employment under the Government.
4. I am also fully aware that if it comes to notice at any time during my service that false information has been furnished or that there has been suppression of factual information in the attestation form my services would be liable to be terminated solely on this ground.
Date : ………………………..
Place:………………………… Signature of the Candidate
Certificate to be signed by a Gazette Officer or Member of Legislature or other as authority prescribed by the Appointing Authority.)
Certified that I have known Sri / Smt……..………………………… Son / Daughter of Sri …………………..… for the last ……………… years …………… months …………….. and to the best of my knowledge and belief the particulars furnished by him / her are correct.
Date : ……………………….. Signature
Place:………………………… Designation of Status and Address
* * *
Annexure - 7
KARNATAKA ACT No.11 OF 1974
(First published in the Karnataka Gazette Extraordinary on the Eleventh day of April, 1974)
THE KARNATAKA STATE CIVIL SERVICES (REGULATION OF PROMOTION, PAY AND PENSION) ACT, 1973.
(Received the assent of the Governor on the Eleventh day of April 1974)
(As amended by Acts 40 of 1976 and 25 of 1982)
An Act to provide for the prospective promotions of civil servants, and to regulate the pay, seniority, pension and other conditions of service of civil servants in the State of Karnataka including those that are allotted or deemed to be allotted to serve in connection with the affairs of the State of Karnataka under or in pursuance of section 115 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956.
Whereas on the basis of the ranking of civil servants in the several inter State seniority lists prepared in pursuance of sub-section (5) of section 115 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 (Central Act 37 of 1956), courts have directed the making of retrospective promotions to statutory and other offices.
And whereas as held by the Supreme Court in Ajit Singh Vs. State of Punjab, reported in all India Reporter 1967, Supreme Court 856 and in Income-Tax Officer, Alleppy Vs. N.C. Ponnoose, reported in All India Reporter 1970, Supreme Court 385 appointments of civil servants to offices in which statutory functions are exercisable cannot be made with retrospective effect.
And whereas retrospective promotions involve payment of large sums of money to persons who have not worked in the promotional posts of officers concerned, to the detriment of the finances of the State, besides involving retrospective reversions rendering invalid the statutory functions discharged by the persons reverted.
And whereas retrospective promotions preclude the determination of the suitability of the civil ser