S VENKATESWARLU Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES KURNOOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Sri J. Sriramulu, Extra-departmetmal Branch Post Master, Bandimadugual A/W Pendekallu Sob-Office, was removed from service with effect from 30-12-1972. The petitioner was appointed as Extra-departmental Branch Post Master, in that vacancy, on 25-1-74 by the Superintendent of Post Offices, Kurnool Division. In the order of appointment it was specifically stated that the appointment of the petitioner shall be in the nature of a contract, liable to be terminated by him or by the appointing authority by notifying the other in writing and that the petitioner shall also be governed by the Posts and Telegraphs Extra-Departmental Agents (Conduct and Service) Rules, 1964 as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) J. Sriramulu questions the order of removal in W.P. No. 3888/76 before this Court. This court allowed the writ petition. In pursuance of the orders of this Court in the said Writ Petition, Sriramulu, the ex-branch Post Master was reappointed as Branch Post Master, Bandimandugula. Consequently the services of the petitioner were terminated. In accordance with the directions of the High Court in W.P. No, 3888/76, departmental action was continued against Sriramulu and he was again removed from service. On 2-1-78 Sriramulu was directed to hand-over charge of the office of Branch Post Master, Bandimadugula to the petitioner and accordingly the petitioner took over charge as Branch Post Master of Bandimadugula on 2-1-78. It appears Sriramulu filed a review petition before the Post Master General, Andhra Circle, Hyderabad, under Rule 16 of the Rules and the Review petition was allowed and the order of removal of J. Sriramulu was set aside by the order dated 5-2-79 and he was re-appointed as Branch Post Master,. Bandimadugula. Consequently, the Superintendent of Post Offices, Kurnool Division, by Memo dated 6-2-79 directed the petitioner to band over charge of the office of the Branch Post Master, Bondimadugula to J. Sriramulu. It is this order of the Superintendent of Post Offices. Kurnool Division, that is sought to be interdicted in this Writ Petition. The petitioner alleges that the post of an extra-departmental Branch Post Master is a Civil Post and that the termination of bis service without any notice to him is contrary to the provisions of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution..

(2.) In the counter affidavit filed by the Assistant Post Master General on behalf of the respondent it is stated that the termination of the appointment of the petitioner was under Rule 6 of the Rules and that the petitioner, who has not rendered more than three years of service, was liable to be terminated by the appointing authority without any notice and without assigning any reasons under Rule 6. It is also stated in the counter that the appointment of the petitioner made on 25-1-74 was terminated on 2-7-77 consequent to the orders of the High Court in W.P. No. 3888/76 and J. Sriramulu was appointed as Extra-departmental Branch Post Master. Bandimadugula and as such the petitioner ceased to hold the post on 16-7-77 itself. The petitioner was again appointed, according to the respondent, on 2-1-78 in the place of J. Sriramulu purely on temporary basis pending regular selection to the post and pending the disposal of the appeal petition that was referred against the order of removal dated 26-12-77 by the said J. Sriramulu. In such circumstances it is stated that the original appointment dated 25-1-74 was no longer in existence and the petitioner was not entitled to any notice in writing before any order of termination was passed. In substance it is the case of the respondent that the petitioner was appointed as E.D.B.P.M. on 2-1-78 only on temporary and ad-hoc basis in the place of Sriramulu and therefore his services can be terminated without notice assigning any reasons under Rule 6 of the Rules.

(3.) It is now well settled that the post of an extra departmental Agent such as the extra-departmental Branch Post Master is a Civil Post under the Union of India as contemplated by Article 311 of the Constitution and such an extra-departmental Agent is entitled to the protection of Article 311(2) of the Constitution. It is the case of the respondent that the petitioner, who was appointed purely on temporary and ad-hoc basis on 2-1-78 in the place of J. Sriramulu, was removed under Rule 6 of the Rules. So the qusetion is whether the removal of the petitioner under Rule 6 of the Rules is illegal.