ORDER Vilas V. Afzulpurkar, J. WP No. 23396 2014: 1. The Andhra Pradesh State Minorities Commission (for short 'the Commission') has moved the present writ petition seeking a mandamus as under: "to issue a writ, order or direction and more particularly one in the nature of writ of "mandamus-declaring the action of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in not allotting any Budget to the petitioner Commission, in not providing accommodation for the residence of the Chairman of the Commission, in not providing a full time Secretary to the Commission, in not providing any infrastructure for the functioning of the Commission, in not providing any paraphernalia for the functioning of the Commission, in not providing any facilities, which have been approved by the Government, such as Car, Telephone, Furniture, etc., for the petitioner Commission and the action of the 1" Respondent in not notifying the petitioner Commission for inclusion in the Xth Schedule of the A.P. State Reorganisation Act as being arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and consequently- (a) direct respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to provide sufficient Budget and a full time Secretary to the Commission for the functioning of the Commission and other facilities, including the infrastructure, vehicle, furniture equipment, telephone, etc. and also pay salaries and emoluments to the Chairman, Members and other staff of the petitioner Commission, forthwith, so that the petitioner Commission can function as directed, pursuant to the Memo dated 15.5.2014; (b) direct respondent No. 1 to issue Notification in pursuance of Section 75(2) of the A.P. State Reorganisation Act for including the petitioner Commission in the X Schedule of A.P. State Reorganisation Act; and (c) pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." Since the statutory Commission had moved the present writ petition and the complaint of the Commission being serious in nature, on 21.8.2014, learned Government Pleaders representing respondents 2 and 3 had taken notice and had sought time for getting instructions. Thereafter, the learned Special Government Pleaders on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 were heard initially on 2.9.2014 and both the Special Government Pleaders were required to get instructions with regard to the Budget proposals earmarked for the Commission and also indicate the amount each State would release to take care of the immediate needs of the Commission pending finalization of the Budget proposals. The writ petition was again heard on 9.9.2014 but as there was no progress reported, it was again posted to 12.9.2014 and was heard on 15.9.2014. While Mr. D. Prakash Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appeared for the petitioner, learned Special Government Pleader appeared for respondent No. 3 and learned Advocate General appeared for respondent No. 2. 2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Commission submits that the Commission is appointed under the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act, AP Act 31 of 1998 and the Commission reconstituted under Section 3, thereafter, was notified under G.O. Ms. No. 42 Minorities Welfare (IDM) Department dated 16.5.2013 for period of three years from the date of taking over of charge. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the Commission, accordingly, took charge on 25.5.2013. The affidavit filed the Commission, however, states in Paras 11 and 12 as follows, which is reproduced for the sake of convenience: "11. I respectfully submit that after assuming the charge, the Commission brought it to the notice of the State Government of Andhra Pradesh and represented about providing amenities, staff Budget, salaries, accommodation, infrastructure from time to time, and written representations were also made to the State Government of Andhra Pradesh on 29.7.2013, 13.8.2013, 3.9.2014 narrating detailed facts and circumstances and requested to sanction the release of Budget, provide staff, infrastructure, accommodation etc. As of now there are only 4 employees working on deputation though there is sanctioned cadre Order strength of 17 employees, apart from the above insufficient accommodation has been provided without any infrastructure. Ever since its reconstitution on 15.6.2013, Salaries, Honorarium or Budget had not been released till March, 2014 and only in March 2014 part salaries were paid when a small Budget of Rs. 43,00,000/- was released by way of G.O. Rt. No. 98, M.W. (Budget) Department, dated 24.3.2014 towards fag end of the financial year 2013-2014, which had to be utilized by the end of 31.3.2013. As there were only 6 days left to utilize the Budget, out of Rs. 43,00,000/- an amount of Rs. 17,73,000/- could not be used and the said amount got lapsed. The Commission could only pay the arrears of salary of the Chairman of the Commission and the Members of the Commission could not be paid at all, because despite the repeated requests, the remuneration and emoluments of the Members of the Commission were not fixed by the State Government. 12. The Commission could only pay the arrears of salary of the Chairman of the Commission and the Members of the Commission could not be paid at all, because despite the repeated requests, the remuneration and emoluments of the Members of the Commission were not fixed by the State Government. 12. Thereafter for the financial year 2014-15, no Budget whatsoever has been allocated for the Commission and no employee or Member is being paid the salaries, including the Chairman of the Commission, whose post has been given the status of the rank of a Cabinet Minister." 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner Commission, therefore, complains of non-allotment of Budget, not providing any infrastructure or paraphernalia for the purpose of functioning of the Commission including that the Secretary appointed for the Commission holds additional charge of Deputy Secretary in the Minorities Welfare Department, who has not been able to attend to the duties at the Commission. Learned Senior Counsel submits that after bifurcation of the State into the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh with effect from 2.6.2014, the Commission being not included in the Tenth Schedule of the A.P. Reorganization Act, 2014 (for short 'the Reorganization Act'), various representations were made by the Chairman as well as by the Chief Secretary addressed to the Government of India requesting for inclusion of the Commission under the Tenth Schedule. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that the Chairman also made several representations dated 29.7.2013, 13.8.2013 and 3.9.2014 to the State of Andhra Pradesh requesting them the need to release the Budget, provide infrastructure, staff etc. and it is stated as against the strength of 17 employees only 4 employees are working on deputation and thereby, seriously hampering and affecting the work of the Commission. The present writ petition, therefore, came to be filed as there was no response from respondents 2 and 3. 4. Learned Advocate General, appearing for the State of Telangana, however, submitted that after the formation of State of Telangana, the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act has been adapted by the State of Telangana while issuing G.O. Ms. No. 3 Minorities Welfare (Estt.II) Department dated 22.8.2014. Learned Advocate General referred to Section 101 of the Reorganization Act under which the State of Telangana is empowered to adapt with or without modifications laws prevailing in the State before the appointed day. No. 3 Minorities Welfare (Estt.II) Department dated 22.8.2014. Learned Advocate General referred to Section 101 of the Reorganization Act under which the State of Telangana is empowered to adapt with or without modifications laws prevailing in the State before the appointed day. Reliance is also placed on Section 103 of the Reorganization Act where the Government of the State of Telangana was empowered by notification in the Official Gazette to specify the authority, officer or person, who shall be competent to exercise such functions exercisable under any law in force on or after the appointed day. Learned Advocate General, therefore, submits that in view of the adaptation of the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act, the State of Telangana intends to create its own Minorities Commission and name the members of the Commission as it is empowered to do so. Learned Advocate General also submitted that in view of the statutory power vested in the State of Telangana to create its own Minorities Commission, the existing Commission i.e. petitioner herein would be entirely the Commission, which would exercise its powers with reference to the State of Andhra Pradesh. Consequently, it is stated that no relief, as sought for by the petitioner Commission, can be granted insofar as respondent No. 2 is concerned i.e., the State of Telangana. Learned Advocate General for the State of Telangana contended that though separate Commission is envisaged by the State of Telangana, the State of Telangana has already honoured the bills of the Commission and according to him, excess amount is paid to the petitioner Commission over and above the liability of the State of Telangana. 5. Learned Special Government Pleader, appearing for respondent No. 3, submits, on instructions, that the Chief Secretary of the State of Andhra Pradesh had already addressed a communication to the Government of India for inclusion of the petitioner Commission under Tenth Schedule of the Reorganization Act. Learned Special Government Pleader submits that in the Budget estimates, provision is made for Rs. 1.05 crores under various sub-heads under Non-Plan so as to meet the requirement of the petitioner Commission for the financial year 2014-2015. Learned Special Government Pleader submits that the Finance Department had only allotted an amount of Rs. 9.27 lakhs as against the proposed amount of Rs. 1.05 crores. Learned Special Government Pleader submits that in accordance with G.O. Ms. 1.05 crores under various sub-heads under Non-Plan so as to meet the requirement of the petitioner Commission for the financial year 2014-2015. Learned Special Government Pleader submits that the Finance Department had only allotted an amount of Rs. 9.27 lakhs as against the proposed amount of Rs. 1.05 crores. Learned Special Government Pleader submits that in accordance with G.O. Ms. No. 88 Finance (BG.I) Department dated 26.4.2014, issued by the then Government of Andhra Pradesh, the expenditure on the Constitutional Institutions, State Institutions and other Organizations, which serve both the State of Andhra Pradesh and State of Telangana, as per the provisions of the Reorganization Act shall be initially booked to the consolidated fund of the respective State Governments where such institutions are physically located and later apportioned on population ratio between the two States. Accordingly, the expenditure on the Commission has to be initially booked on consolidated fund of the State of Telangana. Learned Special Government Pleader also stated that in Vote-on-Account Budget from June 2014 to August 2014 the Budget allotted towards salary and allowance of the Chairman is only Rs. 10,000/-. which was available for sanction and release and the Budget allotted for the year 2014-2015 towards salaries and allowances of the Chairman of the Commission is Rs. 36,000/- after deducting Rs. 10,000/-, which was allotted in the Vote-on-Account, will be available after 15.9.2014. 6. So far as inclusion of the petitioner Commission in the Tenth Schedule, as sought for by the petitioner as well as the State of Andhra Pradesh, is concerned, learned Advocate General for the State of Telangana placed on record a letter of the State of Telangana, Minorities Welfare Department dated 1.9.2014 addressed to the Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, that the Government of Telangana, Minorities Welfare Department withdraws the proposal to include the petitioner Commission in Tenth Schedule of the Reorganization Act. Admittedly, no orders were passed by the Government of India regarding inclusion of any other institution in the X Schedule of the Reorganization Act. 7. From the submissions, as recorded above, it is evident that various questions relating to enforcement of the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act as well as the Reorganization Act would fall for consideration in the writ petition and since none of the respondents have so far filed any counter-affidavit, the writ petition deserves to be admitted. Hence, Rule Nisi. Call for Records. Hence, Rule Nisi. Call for Records. Notice returnable in four (4) weeks. Let counters be filed on behalf of the learned Assistant Solicitor General for the first respondent and on behalf of the respective States. List after counters are filed. WPMP No. 29304 of 2014: 8. This application is filed seeking direction against respondents 2 and 3 to forthwith release Budget to pay salaries of the Chairman, Members and other staff of the Commission, functioning of the Commission and allotment of adequate staff for smooth functioning of the Commission. 9. Section 75 of the Reorganization Act provides that in respect of the institutions specified in the Tenth Schedule of the Reorganization Act both the States are under obligation to provide facilities to the people of the other State within a period of one year from the appointed day or if no agreement is reached within the said period, as may be fixed by order of the Central Government. Prima facie, therefore, since the petitioner Commission is not part of the Tenth Schedule, the obligation cast on both the States under Section 75 of the Reorganization Act is not attracted. 10. It is also to be noted that under the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act, apart from Chairman and Members, Section 7 of the A.P. Minorities Commission Act provides for appointment of Secretary, who shall be an officer of the Government not below the rank of Deputy Secretary and the salaries and allowances payable to and other terms and conditions of the Secretary, officers and other employees appointed for the purpose of the Commission shall be such as may be prescribed. Section 8 of the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act provide that the salaries and allowances payable to the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Members and the administrative expenses, including salaries, allowances and pension payable to the officers and other employees referred to in Section 7 shall be paid out of the grants referred to in sub-section (1) of Section 15. The said Section15 provides as follows: "15.(1) The Government shall, after due appropriate made by the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly by law in this behalf, pay to the Commission by way of grants such sums of money as the Government may think fit for being utilized for the purposes of this Act. The said Section15 provides as follows: "15.(1) The Government shall, after due appropriate made by the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly by law in this behalf, pay to the Commission by way of grants such sums of money as the Government may think fit for being utilized for the purposes of this Act. (2) The Commission may spend such sums as it thinks fit for performing the functions under this Act and such sums shall be treated as expenditure payable out of the grants referred to in sub-section (1) thereof." It is, therefore, clear from the above that the necessary expenditure for the Commission has to be borne out by the State Government in terms of Section 15 of the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act. 11. The petitioner Commission also filed along with the writ petition, G.Os., issued by the then Government of Andhra Pradesh according status of Cabinet Minister to the Chairman of the A.P. State Minorities Commission, reference may be made to G.O. Rt. No. 2478 General Administration (Poll.D) Department dated 3.6.2013. 12. The situation at present, therefore, clearly establishes that the petitioner Commission, which is a statutory Commission, is not able to discharge its functions and duties under the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act and for that purpose all the facilities envisaged under the Act are required to be provided, failing which the effective functioning of the Commission as well as the very purpose and objects of the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act would get defeated. Though the State of the Telangana has taken a stand that it would form its own Commission, as things exist, as on today, no such Commission is constituted. So far as the State of Andhra Pradesh is concerned, it also cannot disown its responsibility with regard to implementation of obligation cast on it in terms of the A.P. State Minorities Commission Act, as discussed above. 13. As already recorded, prima facie, that Section 75 of the Reorganization Act is not in terms applicable, the petitioner Commission, being a statutory Commission, is required to be provided with immediate infrastructural assistance by the respondents. In order to ensure the smooth functioning of the petitioner Commission, therefore, the principles under Section 75 of the Reorganization Act, in my view, can be borrowed and applied to the facts of this case. In order to ensure the smooth functioning of the petitioner Commission, therefore, the principles under Section 75 of the Reorganization Act, in my view, can be borrowed and applied to the facts of this case. There is no material, as at present, to ascertain the exact amount of Budget provided by either of the States so far as the petitioner Commission is concerned. Hence, as at present and till the State of Telangana constitutes its own Commission, in my view, both the States are under obligation to provide necessary grants to meet the immediate expenditure of the petitioner Commission and the such grants can be later apportioned in terms of the population ratio fixed between the two States. 14. When this order was proposed to be pronounced on 22.8.2014, learned Advocate General mentioned for consideration of two decisions of the Supreme Court in State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh, (1976) 3 SCC 242 (Para 12) and CCT v. Swarn Rekha Cokes and Coals (P) Ltd., (2004) 6 SCC 689 (Para 29). Though the aforesaid decisions were cited after the order was dictated and about to be pronounced, the principle followed in the present order is the same principle, which is stated by the Supreme Court in Balbir Singh's case (see Para 12) as under: ".......In our judgment when there is no change of sovereignty and it is merely an adjustment of territories by the organization of a particular State, the administrative orders made by the Government of the erstwhile State continue to be in force and effective and binding on the successor States until and unless they are modified, changed or repudiated by the Governments of the successor States..." Pending further detailed hearing of the matter, therefore, there shall be interim direction to respondents 2 and 3 as under: 1. Respondents 2 and 3 shall set apart for the use and needs of the Commission sufficient amount, which shall, for the present, be treated as provisional grant by the respective States subject to its apportionment between the two States in terms of the population ratio, as provided under the Reorganization Act. 2. Respondents 2 and 3 shall set apart for the use and needs of the Commission sufficient amount, which shall, for the present, be treated as provisional grant by the respective States subject to its apportionment between the two States in terms of the population ratio, as provided under the Reorganization Act. 2. Respondents 2 and 3 shall, accordingly, honour the bills and urgent requirements of the Commission as and when such requisition is received, by following the same procedure as has been followed for institutions included in the Tenth Schedule, by respondents 2 and 3 from out of the temporary grant earmarked, as above. 3. The directions aforesaid shall be in operation and shall be implemented by respondents 2 and 3 till respondent No. 2 constitutes a separate Minorities Commission for the State of Telangana and in such a situation, the directions given hereinabove shall be applicable against respondent No. 3 only.