C RADHAKRISHNA REDDY Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Promotee Engineers of the Roads and Buildings Wing of the Andhra Pradesh Engineering Service are the petitioners in this application under Article 32 of the Constitution and challenge is to the government circular of 12/08/1988 (Annexure A) fixing the guideline for the drawing up of the seniority list pursuant to a direction issued by this court in a batch of writ petitions, decision whereof is reported in K. Siva Reddy v. State of A. P.

(2.) While petitioners are promotees, the respondents are direct recruits. Petitioners allege that they had put in continuous service of 6-7 years by 1982 and their services having been regularised in the post ofdeputy Executive Engineer in the year 1974-75, direct recruits appointed in the year 1982 cannot under any law be placed above them.

(3.) As noticed in Siva Reddy case , substantive vacancies in the category of Assistant Engineers had to be filled up from two sources - 37 1/2 per cent by direct recruitment and the remaining 62 1/2 per cent by transfer of Supervisors and Draughtsmen and by promotion of Junior Engineers. Direct recruits had complained that notwithstanding this prescription, there had been no recruitment of Assistant Engineers and the promotees from the other two modes had come into the cadre far in excess of the limit provided by the Rules. The Chief Engineer by his order dated 8/06/1984 regularised the temporary service of promotees of the years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75 in the cadre of Assistant Engineers (later designated as Deputy Executive Engineers). They had, therefore, asked for quashing of the regularisation and drawing up of a seniority list on the basis of the ratio fixed under Rule 3 (1 of the Special Rules. This court in paragraph 5 of the judgment stated