SYED MD GHOUSE Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein seeks a direction to the respondents 1, 2 and 3 to implement the orders of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal dated 18-12-1985 in K P. No. 1715 of 1984. The petitioner also seeks a declaration that the amendment issued by the President of India in GSR No. 805 (E) dated 22-5-86 is unconstitutional and ultra vires of his powers in so far as the amendment to paragraph 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal Order, 1975 is concerned.

(2.) Appearing on behalf of respondents, 1, 2 and 3, the learned Advocate-General raised the plea that this writ petition is not maintainable, and should be rejected in limine, as, according to the learned Advocate General clause (7) of Article 3710 of the Constitution of India ousts the jurisdiction of this Court to exercise .power in relation to service matters which are in the exclusive domain of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. Quite a few writ petitions are pending before this Court wherein, the aforesaid question is involved. Considering the general importance of this question all the writ petitions were posted together.

(3.) We have heard Sri P. Balakrishna Murthy, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner in this writ petition and also the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of ether other writ petitioners. We have also heard the learned Advocate-General in the matter. Sri Bala Krishnamurthy urged two contentions for consideration of this Court: