Telangana High Court
WP/15174/2004 of K.S.S.N.Raju, Vs The Senior Deputy Director General, (B.W) on 31 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO: 15174 of 2004 Between: 1 K.S.S.N.Raju, s/o K.Subba Raju, BSNL, Tirupati, Chittoor
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUSTTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU
WRIT PETITION NO: 15174 of 2004
Between:
1 K.S.S.N.Raju, s/o K.Subba Raju,
BSNL, Tirupati, Chittoor District.
2 G.Vishnu Vardhan Raju, s/o G.Naga Raju, Civil, O/o.S.D.E.Civil, BSNL, Tirupati, Chittoor District.
3 J.Rama Rao, S/o Guruswamy,
O/o.S.D.E.Civil, BSNL, Rajahmundry.
..... PETITIONERS
AND
1 The Senior Deputy Director General, (B.W)
O/o The Chairman and Managing Director, BSNL, New Delhi.
2 The Chief Engineer, Civil, BSNL, Palace Heights, II Floor, Abids, Hyderabad-1.
3 The Chief General Manager, Telecom, A.P.Circle, Hyderabad.
4 The Chairman & Managing Director, BSNL, New Delhi.
5 Union of India, rep., by its Secretary to the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions (Dept. of Personnel & Training)
New Delhi.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased toissue a writ order or direction more in the nature of mandamus declaringLr.No.5(1)TR/CE(C)/BSNL/HYD/1026, 1027 and 1028 dated 6-3-2003 issued by theChief Engineer (C), BSNL, Civil Zone, A.P., Hyderabad as illegal, arbitrary,discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution andconsequently hold that the petitioners are entitled for grant of first financial up-gradation under A.C.P. Scheme in the scale of Rs.6500-10500 on completion of 12
years of regular service as Junior Engineer (Civil) or from 9-8-1999 which is laterand also be pleased to further hold that denial of the said benefit of financial up-gradation to the petitioners while granting it under similar circumstances to theStenographers, Inspectors of Post Offices etc., is quite discriminatory.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VENKATESWARA RAO
Counsel for the Respondents: SMT. P.SHARADHA (SC FOR BSNL)
The Court at the stage of admission made the following:
HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU
WRIT PETITION NO.15174 OF 2004
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioners contended that they were appointed as Junior Engineers(Civil) after their passing of All India Departmental Competitive Examinationheld in 1987 under 16 2/3 % departmental quota and were selected on merit.They were appointed as Junior Engineers with effect from 11-06-1987,15-06-1987 and 27-05-1988 respectively and since then they are working in the saidposts. The petitioners are further contending that as per Article 3.1 of theOfficial Memorandum issued by the Government of India on 09-08-1999, anAssured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme has been introduced by theGovernment of India making the employees, who have completed 12 years ofregular service period and remained without any promotion, are entitled for twofinancial up- gradations. The employees working in Group ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’Categories who have no promotional avenues shall also qualify for similarbenefit. The petitioners are contending that they belong to ‘C’ category, and asper the said Official Memorandum, they are entitled for the benefit of ‘ACP’Scheme. The petitioners further contended that the Government of India,through an Official Memorandum dated 10-02-2000 under Serial No.8 of theannexure, clarified that those who are inducted into service through a limiteddepartmental competitive examination be treated as direct recruits for thepurpose of extending the benefit under ACP Scheme.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the benefit extended tothe employees who have completed 12 years of service in the same cadrethrough Official Memorandum dated 09-08-1999 and clarification through anOfficial Memorandum dated 10-02-2000, the second respondent passed the
impugned orders on 06-03-2003 informing the petitioners that as per para 3 ofletter No.2-1/99-CSE dated 03-05-2001 and clarification given under para 8 ofletter No.35034/1/9A-EE (HQ) Volume II dated 10-02-2000, the petitioners arenot eligible for ACP Scheme, since they have been appointed as JuniorEngineers (Civil) through departmental competitive examination under 16 2/3%quota. Though the petitioners were appointed as draughts men Grade II in theyear 1979, they appeared for the All India Departmental CompetitiveExamination for appointment to the cadre of Junior Engineers (Civil) during theyear 1987 under the quota reserved for the departmental vacancies at 16 2/3%and got selected for the said posts on merit and later appointed as JuniorEngineers (Civil).
3. After careful reading of Clause (8) of the Official Memorandum, dated10-02-2000, it is indicating that those who were selected through adepartmental competitive examination have to be treated as direct recruits. Thepetitioners are contending that from the date of their appointment as JuniorEngineers (Civil) they have completed 12 years of service in that categorywithout adding their earlier service as draughts men. So long as the officialmemorandum dated 09-08-1999 is in force, the employees those who havecompleted 12 years of service in the same post after direct recruitment areentitled for the benefit of ‘ACP Scheme’.
4. In the light of the circumstances explained by the petitioners, I amconvinced that there is sufficient force in the contention of the petitioners thaton completion of 12 years service in the cadre of Junior Engineers (Civil), theyare entitled for the benefit of ‘ACP Scheme’. The petitioners further contendedthat they continue to get the same scale of pay as draughts men Grade II aswell as Junior Engineers (Civil) till this date. Therefore, even if the post ofJunior Engineer (Civil) is treated as a promotion post, they are entitled for thebenefit of ‘ACP Scheme’.
5. In the light of the above circumstances, the impugned orders of thesecond respondent dated 06-03-2003 are liable to be set aside. The secondrespondent is hereby directed to consider the cases of the petitioners forextending the benefit of ‘ACP Scheme’ on satisfying that they have completed12 years of service in the same cadre after their appointment through direct recruitment and pass fresh appropriate orders by keeping in view the OfficialMemorandums mentioned above, within two months from the date of receipt ofa copy of this order.
6. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.
--------------------------------
Dr. G.YETHIRAJULU, J
26[th] August, 2004SKM
Note:
Furnish C.C. within one week.
B/o.skm
TO
1 The Senior Deputy Director General, (B.W)O/o The Chairman and Managing Director, BSNL, New Delhi. 2 The Chief Engineer, Civil, BSNL, Palace Heights, II Floor, Abids, Hyderabad-1.3 The Chief General Manager, Telecom, A.P.Circle, Hyderabad.4 The Chairman & Managing Director, BSNL, New Delhi.5 The Secretary to the Ministry of Personnel, Union of India, Public Grievances & Pensions (Dept. of Personnel & Training)
New Delhi.
6 Two C.D. Copies.