(Per Ramesh Ranganathan, J.)

W.P. No. 6068 of 2004 is filed against the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 6334 of 1997. W.P. Nos. 6123 of 2004 and 16890 of 2006 are filed against the order in O.A. No. 1854 of 1997.

2. O.A. No. 1854 of 1997 and batch, which included O.A. No. 6334 of 1997, was allowed by the Tribunal, in its order dated 27-03-2003, and the rules in G.O.Ms. No. 14 dated 26-11-1994, as amended in G.O.Ms. No. 22 dated 09-05-1996, to the extent they provided a channel for the senior assistants and senior stenographers, working in the head office of the labour, factories and boiler departments and subordinate offices of the factories and boilers department, to be appointed by transfer to the post of assistant labour officer and the related provisions providing for quota and rotation etc., to these categories, were declared void being violative of the mandatory provisions of the A.P. Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the Presidential Order) and the respondents in the O.A. were directed not to give effect to these provisions. The Tribunal, however, held that as the earlier judgments of the Supreme Court had upheld similar rules, and it was only in V. Jagannadha Rao v. State of A.P.1 (judgment dated 07-11-2001) that these rules were held to be in violation of the Presidential Order, any action taken in compliance with the rules till 07-11-2001 should not be disturbed so as to result in reversion of any employee from the post to which he had been promoted under these rules.

3. It is only to the limited extent that the order of the Tribunal, in O.A. No. 1854 of 1997 and batch, has been given prospective effect from the date of the judgment of the Supreme Court in V. Jagannadha Rao1 that the applicants, in O.A. No. 1854 of 1997 and O.A. No. 6334 of 1997, have filed W.P. No. 6123 of 2004 and W.P. No. 6068 of 2004 respectively. Some of the respondents, in O.A. No. 1854 of 1997, have filed W.P. No. 16890 of 2006 before this Court aggrieved by order of the Tribunal declaring the channel prescribed, for appointment by transfer to the post of assistant labour officer, in the rules notified in G.O.Ms. No. 14 dated 26-11-1994, as amended by G.O.Ms. No. 22 dated 09-05-1996, ultra vires the Presidential Order.

4. The applicants in O.A. No. 1854 of 1997 & batch are mainly senior assistants working in the subordinate offices of the labour department and are members of the A.P. Labour Subordinate Service. The senior assistants and senior stenographers working in the subordinate offices of the labour department, along with the senior assistants and senior stenographers working in the head office, and those working in subordinate offices of the factories and boilers department, form the feeder categories, for appointment by transfer to the post of assistant labour officer, under Rule 3 of the A.P. Labour Subordinate Service Rules.

5. The applicants, in O.A.No.1854 and batch, contended before the Tribunal that the post of assistant labour officer was a zonal post and, therefore, employees working in the subordinate offices in the respective zones were alone entitled to form the feeder category. They contended that inclusion of other categories, from outside the zone, to form part of the feeder channel for appointment by transfer to zonal cadre posts offended the provisions of Para 3(3) and 5(1) of the Presidential Order. The respondents, in O.A. No. 1854 of 1997 & batch, however, relied on Para 5(2) of the Presidential Order, which permits transfer of employees from outside the zone, to contend that inclusion of senior assistants and senior stenographers working in the office of the head of the department, and senior assistants and senior stenographers of the factories and boilers department, to form part of the feeder categories, for appointment by transfer to the post of assistant labour officer, did not violate the