SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(AP) 251

A.SEETHARAM REDDY, R.K.A.SUBRAHMANYA
M. SUBBA RAO – Appellant
Versus
State OF A. P. , SECRETARY, HOUSING, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT. , HYDERABAD – Respondent


A. SEETHARAM REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THESE petitions could be disposed of by a common order as they involve common points.

( 2 ) THE petitioners have been working as Deputy Executive Eagineers in Public Health Division. Aggrieved against the Government orders in g. O. Ms. No. 494, dated 13-4-1987 and G. O. Ms. No. 495 of the said date in not allotting the petitioners to Zone I/vii which was requested for by them initially and since that was not acceptable to the allotment Committee, appeals were preferred therefor which were rejected by the aforesaid orders, hence, these two Representation Petitions have been filed.

( 3 ) THEIR averments inter alia are that they were allotted as Junior engineers after due selection by the A. P. Public Service Commission in the year 1966 and were appointed w. e. f. 24-2-1968 on regular bisis. They were subsequently promoted on 1-1-1982 as Deputy Executive Engineers. Under a. P. Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 (Presidential Order for short), the petitioners were allotted to Zone-II, Their representation for allotment to zone I/vil was not responded to. Since this was contrary to the principles









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top