P BHARATH BHUSHAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though the arguments are common, the entire batch of 65 cases are divided into two categories. In one batch of writ petitions, the petitioners challenge the action of the respondents in not considering the revised options submitted by them as wholly arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the terms of the tripartite agreements and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and to direct the respondents to consider the revised options of the petitioners and permit them to be in Andhra Pradesh Northern Power Distribution Company Limited (APNPDCL).

(2.) Some of the writ petitions are filed to declare the action of the respondents in allotting them to different distribution companies ignoring the revised options pursuant to the press statement said to have been issued by the Additional Secretary- cum-Convener of High Level Committee published in Eenadu, Telugu Daily News Paper dated 11-7-2002 as illegal and contrary to the Tripartite agreements and violative of Articles 14,16, and 21 of the Constitution of India and to direct the respondents to consider the revised option exercised by them for their allotment in respect of the distribution companies as per the revised option.

(3.) The prayer in some of the writ petitions is to declare the action of the respondents in preparing the individual seniority list company wise instead of following the combined seniority list prepared by erstwhile APSEB, which is affecting the seniority of the employees as illegal and arbitrary and to direct the respondents to allot them to APNPDCL where the juniors of petitioners are getting promotions earlier to them.