Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 891 (TS)

S. Prashanth Kumar v. Union of India

2020-12-28

M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO, T.AMARNATH GOUD

body2020
ORDER : 1. Petitioners in Writ Petition No. 21462 of 2019 are employees in the Institute of Preventive Medicine, Public Health Labs and Food Health Administration Department of the composite State of Andhra Pradesh, working in various capacities. 2. The composite State of Andhra Pradesh was bifurcated into the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh and the new State of Telangana w.e.f. 2.6.2014 under the Andhra Pradesh Re-Organization Act, 2014 which was enacted on 1.3.2014 by the Parliament. 3. Just prior to the commencement of the said Act on 2.6.2014, proceedings Order No. 2 in F. No. 27/13/2013/(SR)/S dated 31.5.2014 were issued by the Department of Personnel and Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions of Union of India (1st respondent) directing persons specified in the Annexure who belong to the organized State-wide Cadres in respect of Heads of Department posts in the Headquarters serving in connection with affairs of the existing State of Andhra Pradesh which, on and from 2.6.2014, forms part of the affairs of both the successor States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, to serve provisionally on and from that day in connection with the affairs of the State of Telangana until further orders. It further stated that the said order does not confer any right on these persons in respect of their final allocation and the Central Government may finally allocate them to any of the successor States in accordance with the provisions of the said Act and the extant Guidelines framed thereunder. 4. The petitioners herein challenge the said proceedings issued by the Union of India (1st respondent) in both the Writ Petitions and contend that the Directorate of Institute of Preventive Medicine, Hyderabad is mentioned at Serial No. 67 of Schedule-X to the Andhra Pradesh Re-organization Act, 2014 and allocation of employees of the said undertaking has to be done in accordance with Section 82 of the Act and the Union of India has no role to perform in the said exercises. 5. According to petitioners, the impugned proceedings is, therefore, wholly without jurisdiction and deserves to be set aside and a direction be given to respondent nos. 5. According to petitioners, the impugned proceedings is, therefore, wholly without jurisdiction and deserves to be set aside and a direction be given to respondent nos. 7 and 6 in W.P. No. 21462 of 2019 which are the successor entities of the new State of Telangana and the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh to the Directorate of Institute of Preventive Medicine, Hyderabad of the composite State of Andhra Pradesh to frame modalities for distribution of the employees of the said Institution between the two successor entities. 6. Reliance is placed on the Division Bench decision of this Court dated 07.08.2020 in Writ Petition No. 7225 of 2020 and batch relating to another Schedule-X Institution, i.e. the Andhra Pradesh State Residential Educational Institutions Society, which is mentioned at Serial No. 41 of Schedule-X to the Andhra Pradesh Re-organization Act. 7. Section 82 of the Act states: “82. Provisions for employees of Public Sector Undertakings, etc. - On and from the appointed day, the employees of State Public Sector Undertakings, corporations and other autonomous bodies shall continue to function in such undertaking, corporation or autonomous bodies for a period of one year and during this period the corporate body concerned shall determine the modalities for distributing the personnel between the two successor States.” 8. - On and from the appointed day, the employees of State Public Sector Undertakings, corporations and other autonomous bodies shall continue to function in such undertaking, corporation or autonomous bodies for a period of one year and during this period the corporate body concerned shall determine the modalities for distributing the personnel between the two successor States.” 8. In the order dated 7.8.2020 in W.P. No. 7225 and batch of 2020, this Bench had followed the earlier decisions interpreting this provision in G. Rama Mohan Rao and Another vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Another, 2017 (6) ALD 103 (DB), P.B. Karunakar and Others vs. State of Telangana and Others, 2018 (3) ALD 470 (DB) and Rani vs. Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department and Others, 2017 (4) ALT 173 and had declared that only Section 82 governs distribution of Employees of IX and X Schedule bodies/entities/institutions and since the erstwhile APREIS is also mentioned at Serial No. 41 in the Schedule-X the division of employees of the erstwhile APREIS is governed by Section 82 only, that Section 77 of the Act has no application; that the successor entities to the erstwhile APREIS, i.e. the TREIS and the new APREIS would have to agree upon the modalities for distributing the personnel of the erstwhile APREIS between them; and the State Governments of the new State of Telangana or the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh have no role in the fixing of modalities for distribution of the personnel between TREIS and APREIS. 9. The Union of India has filed a counter-affidavit in Writ Petition No. 21462 of 2019 stating in Para No. 6 thereof that the Directorate of Institute of Preventive Medicine, at Hyderabad was a Schedule X Institution and allocation of its employees has to be dealt with as per procedure prescribed in Section 82 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014. It also specifically stated that the said Institute was not included in the list of Departments/Organizations whose employees were eligible for allocation under Section 77 of the Act and so no final allocation orders under Section 77(2) were issued in respect of its employees. 10. It also specifically stated that the said Institute was not included in the list of Departments/Organizations whose employees were eligible for allocation under Section 77 of the Act and so no final allocation orders under Section 77(2) were issued in respect of its employees. 10. In Para No. 7 of the said counter-affidavit, it was also stated that the impugned provisional allocation order dated 31.05.2014 issued by the Union of India has to be treated as null and void in so far as the employees of the Institute of Preventive Medicine are concerned and their subsequent final allocation as per the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014. It was also categorically stated therein that the Union of India has no role in the said process. 11. Having regard to this stand taken by the Union of India and the decision rendered by this Court on 07.08.2020 in Writ Petition No. 7225 of 2020 and batch and for reasons alike, the Writ Petitions are allowed; the impugned proceedings Order No. 2 in F. No. 27/13/2013-SR(S) dated 31.05.2014 issued by the Union of India (1st respondent) is set aside and declared as null and void and violative of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Re-organization Act, 2014 the respondent nos. 6 and 7 in both Writ Petitions shall discuss with each other and agree on the modalities/Guidelines for allocation of employees of the erstwhile Directorate of Institute of Preventive Medicine, Hyderabad, such as the petitioners and others within two (02) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and then finally allocate the employees including the petitioners in both the Writ Petitions as per the said norms within one (01) month of finalization of the modalities/guidelines. Till then status quo as on date shall be maintained by all parties. 12. Accordingly the Writ Petitions are allowed with the above directions. No order as to costs. 13. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any in these Writ Petitions, shall stand closed.