S. B. SINHA, C. J.

( 1 ) THE 1st respondent herein was appointed as Sewing and Tailoring instructor in Panchayat Raj Department on payment of a consolidated sum of rs. 300/- p. m. She was retrenched. She thereafter made a representation to the district Collector, Cuddapah and although the District Collector was not an appointing authority he directed the Regional Deputy director of Women and Child Welfare, kumool to allot her in any one of the vacant posts of organizers in Cuddapah District in the District Women and Child Welfare office as instructor in sewing and tailoring. Despite the same she had not been absorbed as organiser. Thereafter the 1st respondent filed the original application before the learned Tribunal being numbered as 1292 of 1994. The said application was disposed of directing the respondents therein to absorb her in one of the existing vacancies under the control of the Regional Deputy Director of Women and Child Welfare, Kurnool. She was appointed as Matron by proceedings dated 30-11-1995. The grievance of the 1st respondent in the original application which led to the passing of the impugned order dated 17-9-1998 is that the order of the learned Tribunal in O. A. No. 1292 of 1994 had not been complied with. Having regard to the fact that the Tribunal had passed its earlier order on 18-3-19. 94 in o. A. No. 1292 of 1994 directing the 1st respondent to be absorbed, the learned tribunal allowed the said O. A. directing:"in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed to treat the applicant as having been appointed as organiser w. e. f. 18-3-1994 (the date of the judgment rendered by this tribunal in O. A. No. 1292 of 1994) retrospectively and grant all consequential service benefits including seniority. The O. A. is accordingly allowed with the above directions. "

( 2 ) THE learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the petitioner inter alia submitted that apart from the fact that the Collector was not the appointing authority, in terms of the aforementioned order passed by the Tribunal in O. A. No. 1292 of 1994 having regard to the fact that no post of Organiser was vacant, and only posts of matrons were vacant and the 1st respondent herself expressed her willingness to join that post and she had also given undertaking that she will not have any legal objection, she has been appointed as Matron. The learned Counsel would submit that this aspect of the matter has not been considered by the Tribunal. Sri D. Linga Rao, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent on the other hand submitted that such an undertaking was illegal.

( 3 ) IN the original application the 1st respondent herein stated thus:" (b) Such being the position, strangely the 1st respondent has adopted hostile attitude and obtained willingness from the applicant for her absorption as matron and issued the impugned pro. No. 585/a/94, dated 30-11-1995, appointing the applicant as Matron, regional Children, Cuddapah on the untenable ground that if the orders of the 1st respondent and the orders of the Hon ble Tribunal implemented as the applicant is appointed in the posts of Organizer it would face many troubles (from) local people for filling up of remaining posts which are still vacant which is illegal, discriminatory, unjust and subversive of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also opposed to all equity, justice and fair play. . . . . "

( 4 ) IT is, therefore, not a case where an allegation was made to the effect that the undertaking given by the 1st respondent herein was not a voluntary one. Even the aforementioned statement is not verified,

( 5 ) IT is not in dispute that the Collector, cuddapah had no jurisdiction to direct absorption of the 1st respondent. It has also not been disputed that the appointing authority is the Regional Deputy Director of women and Child Welfare, ikumool. It is also not in dispute that for absorption of surplus employees the procedu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document