ASHRAF ALI KHAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is for the issue of a writ order or direction particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2, to promote the petitioner to the substantive post as Assistant Commandant, Andhra Pradesh Special Police with effect from the date of the order of promotion viz. 6-11-1964.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this petition as emanating from the writ petition and the counter are the following: The petitioner was directly appointed as Reserve Inspector by the erstwhile Hyderabad Government on 27-12-1951. Subsequently he was promoted to the rank of Senior Reserve Inspector with an additional allowance of Rs. 50/-. His name was included in the list of Inspectors, fit for promotion as a Gazetted Officer. The Government by its order G.O. Ms. 2058 home dated 6-11-1964 directed that the (petitioner) may be promoted temporarily as an Assistant Commandant. The second respondent herein, thereupon issued orders on 11-11-1964, promoting the petitioner herein as an Assistant Commandant, Andhra Pradesh Special Police. By a subsequent order dated 12-10-1966 the petitioner was reverted to the post of Reserve Inspector. The petitioner attacks the validity of this order on the ground that it is unjust and contrary to the service rules. He was a permanent employee of the Hyderabad State prior to 1-11-1956 when that State was integrated into the State of Andhra Pradesh. His service was therefore protected by the States Reorganisation Act and he was entitled to one stage promotion after 1-11-1956, as per Hyderabad rules. The Government of India also by their communication dated 27-3-1957 issued instructions that the service conditions applicable immediately before the appointed day viz. 1-11-1956, to any person serving in connection with the affairs of the then existing State, who is transferred to any successor State, should not be varied to the disadvantage, except with the previous approval of the Central Government. The Government of Andhra Pradesh also, by its communication dated 6-5-1957 has decided to follow the aforesaid instructions. The Government of Andhra Pradesh in the G.O. Ms. 497, GAD., dated 7-4-1960 directed that all the employees of the erstwhile Government of Hyderabad State, who are promoted after 1-11-1956 may be governed by the Hyderabad cadre and recruitment rules for promotion to one stage, and subsequent promotion after one stage would however be governed by the rules of the respective State and Subordinate Service Rules. This position was also reiterated in G.O. Ms. 588 GAD, S.R.A. Department dated 16-5-1961, wherein it was also mentioned that the Andhra Pradesh probationary rules would not apply to the employees of the erstwhile Hyderabad State Government. As the petitioner's promotion subsequent to 1-11-1956 to the post of Assistant Commandant being the first and one stage promotion, after the integration of the State, he is therefore governed by Hyderabad Cadre and Recruitment rules, which do not contemplate a temporary promotion. It should therefore be considered to be a regular promotion. The respondents had therefore no right to revert the petitioner to the post of Reserve Inspector (treating the appointment as a temporary one. In doing so they have violated the statutory rules applicable to the petitioner and also the provisions of the Constitution. The respondents 1 and 2 are also trying to promote the third respondent, to the post of Assistant Commandant, even though he is junior to the petitioner herein. The petitioner therefore says that the reversion is in violation of Article 311 of the Constitution of India. No reasonable opportunity was given to the petitioner and no notice of reversion was also given. It amounts to a punishment illegally imposed upon the petitioner as the reversion to the post of Reserve Inspector results in loss of pay and loss of rank, which has already been earned as of right by the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner filed an appeal petition before the Hon'ble Minister, Home Police Dept, on 30-11-1966. He has also forwarded a petition dated 17-3-1969 to the Home secretary and a petition on 12-2-1970 to the High Powered State Advisory Committee. He has also approached the Inspector General of Police on 20-6-1972 and by another petition dated 28-3-1967 addressed to His Excellency the Governor of Andhra Pradesh. Al his representations have proved futile. The petitioner says, that he was discharging his duties most diligently efficiently and honestly to the satisfaction of the superiors and his services have already been admitted and appreciated. The very promotion of the petitioner as Assistant Commandant presupposes the appreciation of his services, good record, and efficiency and merit put in by the petitioner. The order of reversion is therefore illegal arbitrary, opposed to rules and principles of natural justice. The petitioner also stated in the writ petition that in the case of another person Shri Rameshwara Rao, Dy. Superintendent of Police, Cadre III, the Government gave a finding that his promotion after 1-11-56, in similar circumstances though it was termed as a temporary one, must be deemed to be a regular one. If the above said appointment is a regular one, it would be discriminatory, to treat the appointment of the petitioner as a temporary one. The petitioner therefore has approached this court with this writ petition for the above reliefs.