V JAGANNADHA RAO Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for consideration in these appeals is whether the impugned order of the Tribunal striking down certain provisions of the Rules framed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution can be said to be violative of the Presidential order issued under Article 371d of the constitution

(2.) Mr. Rao, the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants, contends that this question has been considered and decided by the judgment of this Court in the cases of State of A. P. v. Sadanandam, (1989) 3 SCR 342 : (AIR 1989 SC 2060 : 1989 Lab 1c 2024) and Govt. of A. P. v. B. Satyanarayana Rao (D) by LRs. , (2000) 1 scc 262 : (2000 AIR SCW 1561 : AIR 2000 sc 1729 : 2000 Lab 1c 1843) wherein at paragraph 5 (2) of the Presidential Order this court has upheld similar provisions as the present ones, which have been struck down by the Tribunal. Mr. Rao states that the rationale behind the aforesaid two decisions is that overriding power has been given to the state Government in express terms in recognition of the principle that public interest and administrative exigencies have precedence over the promotional interest of the member belonging to local cadres and zones.

(3.) We are prima facie not in agreement with the interpretation given to para 5 (2) of the Presidential Order as in our view the provisions contained in para 5 (2) of the Presidential order could be exercised by the State government in favour of specific individual in the interest of administration and in case a rule framed under Proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution contravenes the Presidential order issued under Article 371-D of the constitution, the rule must be struck down.