T K SRINIVASULU Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Here is a man who fought the litigation as party-in-person for over two decades, knocking the doors of justice from the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal to the Supreme Court, to vindicate his right to get appointment as Junior Medical Officer (Homoeo) as per the selections made by the 2nd respondent pursuant to the notification dated 2-1-1979 and 12-1-1979 to fill up 17 vacancies in the 2nd respondent organisation. Ultimately the petitioner succeeded in getting appointment on 10-2-1992 after the Supreme Court dismissed SLP No. 17522 of 1991 on 9-12-1991 which was filed against the orders of this Court in review WA MP No.245 of 1991 in WA No.1020 of 1990 dated 12-7-199!. Though the petitioner sought several reliefs, particularly in WPNo.18764 of 1988, including the implementation of Rule 22 of Andhra Pradesh Subordinate Service Rules hereinafter referred to as "General Rules" providing rule of reservation to the constitutionally permissible classes and consequently to appoint him as Junior Medical Officer/Junior Lecturer (Homoeo) with retrospective effect from 30-3-1979, if necessary by creating supernumerary post with all consequential benefits and initiation of disciplinary action against the 14th respondent, i.e., one Dr. Sudfiakar Reddy who has since retired as Additional Director of the Indian Medicine and Homoeopathic Department for the alleged fraud played by him in making appointments pursuant to the selections that have taken place. As the petitioner was already appointed on 10-2-1992 and Dr. Sudhakar Reddy since retired from service, all those reliefs neither can be considered now nor can be granted at this length of time though some of them are germane to the issue to some extent.

(2.) The learned Government Pleader raised an objection stating that as this matter relates to realm of service, the petitioner has to approach this Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal and this Court cannot adjudicate the dispute. This contention is no more res Integra in view of the orders passed by a Division Bench of this Court in review WAMP No.245 of 1991 in WA No. 1020 of 1990, dated 12-7-1991 as confirmed by the Supreme Court in SLP No. 17522/91, dated 9-12-1991 wherein their Lordships having noted the conduct of the official respondents in not opposing the reliefs sought for by some of the doctors in similar circumstances and also the fact that the question was not even raised before the single Judge, passed the following order :

(3.) Aggrieved by the said orders, the State carried the matter to the Supreme Court by filing SLPNo.17522 of 1991 and the same was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 19-2-1991. Subsequently RP No.2026 of 1987 was finally allowed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal on 14-8-1989. A little later the old Tribunal constituted under Article 371 (D) was abolished and the present Tribunal constituted under Article 323(A) of the Constitution of India came into force on 1-11-1989. When the respondents were not implementing the final orders of the erstwhile Tribunal, the petitioner seemed to have filed OA No.2609 of 1990 on 29-1-1990. By that time the new Tribunal in Thinwavukkarasu v. General Manager, 1989 (2) SLJ (CAT) 349, has taken the view that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain applications from the persons who are not in service. Hence when the matter came up for admission on 28-2-1990, the Tribunal suggested that the petitioner may withdraw the OA and file fresh writ petition for implementation of the orders of the erstwhile Tribunal. Following that he has also filed a memo on 7-9-1990 before the Tribunal. But it seems no orders were passed on that application. Even to Chatidrakumar v. Union of India, AIR 1997(2) SC 1125, their Lordships of the Supreme Court held that :