SHAIK HANEEF Vs. SECRETARY EXCISE DEPT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed challenging the common order dated 27-10-1997 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.Nos. 3187,3188 and 3189 of 1991. By the impugned order, the Tribunal directed the official respondents to fix the seniority of the applicants, who are unofficial respondents herein, by granting their service rendered by them in the Revenue Department with all consequential benefits, treating them as candidates transferred to the Excise Department on administrative grounds.

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that they were initially appointed in different capacities in the Excise Department during the period between 1974 to 1986. Subsequently they were promoted as Junior Assistants between the period from 1985 to 1988. The unofficial respondents herein were appointed as Junior Assistants in the Revenue Department through proceedings dated 22-6-1984 through the Public Service Commission. Later on they were rendered as surplus in the Revenue Department, inasmuch as the Government pursuant to the directions of the 'Supreme Court appointed the Ex-Village Officers as Village Assistants in the Revenue Department. However, since the Government felt that it is not desirable to retrench all the surplus staff in the Revenue Department, though in fact they were treated as retrenched, on humanitarian grounds wanted to absorb them in different departments of the Government by creating supernumerary posts. In that behalf Government have issued G.O.Ms.No. 36 GAD dated 25-1-1990 and memo dated 25-1-1990 directing that the staff rendered surplus should as far as possible be absorbed first before the direct recruitment is taken up. As per G.O.Ms. No. 36 dated 25-1-1990, the absorption of such surplus staff is subject to certain conditions and they will be referred to in the later part of the judgment. As per the G.O., the unofficial respondents were absorbed in Excise Department.

(3.) The case of the unofficial respondents who are applicants before the Tribunal is that they were initially recruited by regular selection conducted by the Public Service Commission during the period between 1980 - 1981 as Junior Assistants. Their services were regularized in 1986 and probation was declared. During 1990, they were transferred to the Excise Department on the ground that they gave willingness for taking last rank among the regular candidates in the Excise Department, even though they have not given any such willingness. Therefore, their case is that in computing seniority in the Excise Department, their earlier service should also be taken into consideration. As stated earlier, the Tribunal has allowed their claim.