DASARI SUBRAHMANYAM Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed challenging G.O.Rt.No.332, Law Department dated 31-10-1994, in and by the terms of which, the 4th respondent was appointed by the first respondent as Government Pleader for Anantapur, Anantapur District for a period of three (3) years from the date of his taking charge of the post, as illegal and void.

(2.) To appreciate the controversy in this case, it is necessary to refer to the relevant facts. One Sri P.Bhaskar Reddy was appointed as Government Pleader, Anantapur, Anantapur District on 31-5-1990 for a period of three years. The said period expired on 30-5-1993 The appointment of Government Pleaders is governed by the order issued in G.O.Ms.No 57, Law Department, dated 16-3- 1990, according to which, the appointment of Law Officers in all Courts, Tribunals subor- dinate to the High Court shall be made on the basis of the recommendations of the District Collector concerned, who shall ascertain the views of the concerned District and Sessions Judge before making the recommendations. In accordance with the procedure prescribed in G.O.Ms.No. 57 dated 16-3-1990, the second respondent sought the views of third respon- dent and called for a panel consisting of five Advocates by his letter dated 12-2-1993. Third respondent in his letter dated 24-2-1993 sent the names of six advocates expressing his views. After the receipt of the names and ascertaining the views of third respondent, second respondent by his communication dated 20-5-1993 recommended a panel of three names only to the first respondent for appointment to the post of Government Pleader, Anantapur, Anantapur District. The other three names included in the panel by the third respondent were not included by the second respondent in the panel recommended by him to the first respondent for certain reasons. While so, first respondent by its letter Dated 4-6-1993 disagreed with the action of the second respondent in not including the three other names in the panel recommended by him, and requested the second respondent to furnish the bio-data of the other persons as well which included fourth respondent. On receipt of the said communication, second respondent in his Rc. FC1/208/93 dated 16-6-1993 enclosed the bio- datas of three advocates including that of fourth respondent as desired by the first respondent. On receipt of the said communication dated 16-6-1993 from the second respondent, impugned G.O.Rt.No 332, Law Department dated 31-10-1994 was issued by the first respondent appointing fourth respondent as Government Pleader for Anantapur, Anantapur District.

(3.) Assailing the said G.O.Rt.No.332 dated 31-10-1994, the petitioners who are in the panel of three names recommended by the second respondent filed the present writ petition.