I APPA RAO Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants were appointed as LDCs (Junior Assistants) on temporary basis between 5/12/1973 to 14/12/1974 in the Commercial Tax Department in the srikakulam District of Visakhapatnam Division. According to them they were so appointed in clear vacancies and that their names were sponsored by an Employment exchange. They, however, did not undergo any selection process and according to them their temporary appointment was under Rule 10 (a) (i) of the AP State subordinate Service Rules which provided for such temporary appointments subject to the condition that the person on such temporary appointment shall not be regarded as on regular employment nor be entitled for any future appointment. The appellants subsequently appeared in the selections held in October 1976 by the District Selection committee Srikakulam. They were selected and allotted by the Collector, Srikakulam to the Commercial Tax Department for regular appointment as LDCs and thereafter the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Visakhapatnam by an order dated 30/11/1976 appointed them temporarily as LDCs. The service of appellants who were being continued as temporary LDCs, were regularised with effect from 3. 6. 1975 as per proceeding dated 9. 1. 1980 of the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, visakhapatnam.

(2.) THE Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Visakhapatnam finalised the integrated provisional seniority list of Junior Assistants in Zone-I as on 30. 6. 1994 vide notification dated 18. 10. 1994. According to the appellants the persons who were junior to them namely the non-official respondents were placed above them in the said list. They, therefore, approached the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in o. A. No. 6834 of 1994 seeking the following reliefs : (a) to quash the final integrated list dated 18. 10. 1994, (b) a direction to the official respondents to prepare a fresh seniority list in accordance with the regularisation order issued on 9. 1. 1980 or in the alternative to direct them to determine their seniority from the date of their initial appointment. The said application was allowed by the Tribunal by its order dated 20/4/1999. The Tribunal was of the view that there was some infirmity in the preparation of the merit list by the District Selection Committee, Srikakulam in regard to the October 1976 selections. Therefore, it set aside the integrated seniority list dated 18/10/1994 insofar as it related to Junior Assistants/typists/stenographers selected in the District Selection Committee selections of 1976 with a direction to the official respondents to prepare the seniority list of Junior assistants/typists/stenographers separately by following the Rules of reservation without reference to the ranking communicated by the Collector in its letter dated 24/12/1991 (the merit list of District Selection Committee Srikakulam for October 1976 selections ). The Tribunal further held that in the absence of any relative merit amongst the candidates selected in District Selection Committee selections of 1976, the length of temporary service, if any, put in by the candidates should be the criterion for fixing inter se seniority amongst the candidates belonging to a category (SCS/bcs/scs/sts) and if the length of service is same, age has to be taken as criterion. The Tribunal further held that after preparing the seniority lists of Junior assistants/typists/steno-Typists separately a common integrated seniority list should be prepared based on dates of regularisation.

(3.) THE said judgment of the High Court is under challenge. Learned counsel for appellants submitted that where the initial appointment was only ad hoc as a stop-gap arrangement, and not according to any Rules, the officiation in such post may not be taken into account for considering the seniority. But where the initial appointment through ad hoc is made by following the Rules, and the appointee continues in the post uninterruptedly till the regularisation of his service in accordance with the Rules, the period of officiating service will be counted. He submitted that the decision of the Tribunal was in consonance with the said principle laid down by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Direct Recruit Class II engineering Officers' Association vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 1990 (2)SCC 715.