RAJASEKHAR V Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were appointed as Lecturers/Asst. Lecturers/Associate Lecturers in the third respondent Polytechnic after calling for applications through advertisement in the newspapers and after proper selection observing rule of reservation. Since all of them are fully qualified, they are entitled to be regularized and they should be deemed to have been regularly appointed. They have been making representations to the respondents for implementation of Revised Pay Scales of 1986 and 1993 as fixed by the Government. While so, the third respondent issued a notification on 4-3-1995 calling for applications for the posts held by the petitioners. The petitioners thereafter made a representation to the Commissioner and Director of Technical Education pointing out to the said advertisement. However, the third respondent issued another notification dated 9-3-1995 for the same purpose and published the same on 14-3-1995. The third respondent management had certified that all the petitioners were recruited as per qualification, and experience laid down by the AICTE. When the petitioners threatened to go on strike, the management has agreed to withdraw the proposed action. But later it again issued a circular memo No. CRP/CPT/ SSC/95 dated 18-5-1995 treating the petitioners as if they were working on Ad hoc basis and they should make applications for regular appointment before 29-5-1995. The petitioners who have been working for several years cannot be thrown out and in fact there is an embargo on the retrenchment and termination under Section 80 of A.P. Education Act- hereinafter called 'the Act'. Hence they filed this writ petition.

(2.) Later by WP MP No. 10779 of 1996 fresh grounds are taken. The third respondent is relying on G.O.Ms.No. 100, Labour, Employment, Nutrition and Technical Education(TE.1) Department, dated 25-5-1984, but it is only an administrative instruction. As the third respondent-Polytechnic is not a Grant- in-Aid institution, this G.O. has no application. The A.P. Unaided Private Polytechnics (Establishment Management an Admission) Rules, 1992 issued under G.O.Ms.No. 247 Education (TC) Department dated 2-7-1992 is ultra vires of the Act in so far as selection of staff is concerned. Sections 20, 21 or 99 of the Act under which the Rules are purported to have been issued do not invest the Government with the power to issue those Rules for constituting the Selection Committee. In any event, the said rules cannot have retrospective effect and they cannot apply to the petitioners who were selected and appointed long before coming into force of these Rules. The third respondent by exerting threat and coercion obtained the signatures from the petitioners on the agreement dated 9-5-1995. Therefore, by way of amendment the petitioners are questioning G.O.Ms. No. 100 dated 25-5-1984 and the Rules made in G.O.Ms.No. 247, dated 2-7-1992 as ultra vires of the A.P. Education Act, and consequently to declare the purported agreement as illegal and void as it is contrary to the Statute.

(3.) The respondent Nos.1 and 2 have not filed any counter-affidavit.