N. DEVA MANDADI Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT Petition Nos. 23932, 23931, 25398 & 23152 of 2010 are filed challenging the order, dated 08.09.2010, in O.A. No. 3143 of 2010 & batch on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short 'the Tribunal'). Writ Petition No. 30110 of 2010 is filed challenging the order, dated 26.10.2010, in O.A. No. 6301 of 2010 on the file of the Tribunal, dismissing as directly covered by the order, dated 08.09.2010, in O.A. No. 12968 of 2009 & batch (includes O.A. No. 3143 of 2010).

(2.) ALL the Writ Petitions are directed to be disposed of through this common order as the facts as well as the questions are identical.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners argued that the Memo dated 21.12.1994 issued by the Government and consequential proceedings dated 22.12.1994 issued by the Commissioner of Excise, were not challenged in any Court; that the petitioners after obtaining the information under Right to Information Act, realised that the Government in a casual manner cancelled selection of 1751 Excise Constables after completing the entire process i.e. after completion of written test, physical efficiency test and interview; that the authorities without issuing appointment orders to the petitioners and others who were selected as Excise Constables by 31.10.1994, the Commissioner of Excise has telephonically instructed all the District Collectors and Excise Superintendents on 24.10.1994 to not to issue appointment orders in view of issuance of election schedule for the General Elections; that if the appointment orders were issued by 31.10.1994, they should have been appointed as Excise Constables and now they would have got further promotion as Excise Head Constables and Excise Sub -Inspectors; that after completion of General Election, the Joint Secretary, Revenue Department, by Memo dated 13.12.1994 requested the Commissioner of Excise to review all the major decisions taken from 01.10.1994 like recruitment in large scale and directed that they may be frozen at current stage pending review of the Government; that the decision regarding filling up of 1751 regular posts of Excise Constables was taken by the Government on 31.08.1994 under G.O.Ms. No. 1303, dated 31.08.1994 and selection process was completed after issuing notification; that the entire selection process including the physical efficiency test, written test and oral interview are completed by 03.10.1994 i.e. must prior to 13.12.1994, therefore the condition imposed in Memo dated 13.12.1994 will not be applicable for the recruitment of 1751 posts of Excise Constables; that as per the Memo dated 21.12.1994, the Government has not taken any decision either to keep in abeyance of G.O.Ms. No. 1303, dated 31.08.1994, wherein the Government has accorded permission to fill up 1751 Excise Constable posts which are regular posts included the cadre of Excise Constables, or the cancellation of the selection of 1751 Excise Constables; that the Memo dated 21.12.1994 clearly discloses and demonstrates that in view of introduction of total prohibition in the State, the Government kept the G.O.Ms. No. 927, dated 21.09.1993 in abeyance; that the information submitted by the Commissioner of Excise by his proceedings dated 15.12.1994 in response to Memo dated 13.12.1994 issued by the Joint Commissioner of Revenue Department also does not disclose any intention of cancel or countermand the selection of 1751 Excise Constable posts; that the authorities without application of mind, cancelled the selection of 1751 Excise Constable posts.