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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Obul Reddi, J.
GOTETI UMAMAHESHWARA PRASAM AND OTHERS - Appellant
Vs.
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD - Respondent
Decided on : 05-12-1973

The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the model standing orders do not apply to industrial establishments governed by special Acts like the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, which provide for their own regulations.

Headnote:

ELECTRICITY BOARD - STANDING ORDERS - APPLICABILITY - INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT (STANDING ORDERS) ACT, 1946 - MODEL STANDING ORDERS - REGULATIONS FRAMED BY ELECTRICITY BOARD - INCONSISTENCY - DISCRIMINATION - ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION - ELECTRICITY (SUPPLY) ACT, 1948 - SECTION 79(C) AND (K) - INTERPRETATION.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, temporary employees of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board, challenged the Board's regulations requiring them to sit for an examination for regularization of their services. They argued that the regulations were inconsistent with the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the model standing orders, and discriminatory, violating Article 14 of the Constitution.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the model standing orders did not apply to the Electricity Board, as it was an industrial establishment under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. The Board had the power to make regulations for its employees under Section 79(c) and (k) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, and the regulations requiring the petitioners to sit for an examination were valid. The court also found that the distinction between temporary employees who had completed two years of service by 1st May 1972 and those who had not was not arbitrary or discriminatory.

Issues: 1. Whether the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the model standing orders applied to the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board. 2. Whether the Board's regulations requiring the petitioners to sit for an examination were inconsistent with the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the model standing orders. 3. Whether the regulations were discriminatory, violating Article 14 of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the model standing orders did not apply to the Electricity Board, as it was an industrial establishment under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. 2. The Board had the power to make regulations for its employees under Section 79(c) and (k) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, and the regulations requiring the petitioners to sit for an examination were valid. 3. The distinction between temporary employees who had completed two years of service by 1st May 1972 and those who had not was not arbitrary or discriminatory.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the Board's regulations were valid and not discriminatory.

JUDGMENT :

Obul Reddi, J. - These two writ petitions raise a common question whether the regulations made by the respondent-Electricity Board are in any way inconsistent with the provisions of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the model standing orders made thereunder.

2. It may be stated at the outset that a preliminary objection is taken by Sri T. Anantha Babu, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, that the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, and the model standing orders are not applicable to the respondent-Electricity Board.

3. The facts necessary for determination of the question raised are these. Fourteen employees in Writ Petition No. 2372 of 1972 and sixty-six employees in Writ Petition No. 4508 of 1973 of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board have filed these writ petitions questioning the right of the respondents to insist upon the petitioners sitting for an examination in pursuance of Board's Proceedings in B.P. Ms. No. 287, dated 1st May, 1972. The petitioners in both the writ petitions were temporarily appointed either as lower division clerks or typists or stenotypists as the case may be in the various sub-officers of the Electricity Board. Recruitment on a temporary or emergency basis to the said posts was being made by the Electricity Board from 1967 onwards. For the purpose of regularizing the services of the temporary lower division clerks or typists, the Board issued proceeding B. P. Ms. No. 241, dated 28th March, 1969, as there were more than 1,000 typists and clerks recruited on emergency basis. They all agitated for their permanent absorption. It was, therefore, felt by the Board that it may not be desirable to keep such large number of employees in suspense about their future without conferring any benefits of service on them and, therefore, they made certain rules for regularizing their services. Graduates whose work was considered satisfactory should be regularized without any test. Others who possessed the minimum educational qualifications with a good record of service may be interviewed and selected. Such of those who did not possess the minimum qualifications or have an unsatisfactory record should be discharged after giving one month's pay. Certain concessions were also provided to those employees who had become over-aged for relaxation of the rules. Reservation was also made for scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. The manner in which the seniority should be fixed was also provided in these proceedings. Pursuant to the policy enunciated in the aforesaid proceedings, the services of good number of temporary clerks and typists were regularized. Then came the next proceedings of the Board in B. P. Ms. No. 287, dated 1st May, 1972. These proceedings were issued by the Electricity Board in exercise of the powers conferred upon it u/s 79 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. Under these regulations, all those who were temporarily employed were to be called "emergency employees." All of them were entitled to have their services regularized under Regulation 23 of the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Service Regulations, Part II, on passing the qualifying test prescribed. The various tests to be held are also specified in these proceedings. These proceedings were followed by Board's proceedings in B. P. Rt. No. 548, dated 2nd September, 1972, which were issued on account of the representations made by the associations of lower division clerks and typists. They wanted their services to be regularized without any test as was done in the case of lower division clerks and typists who had put in two years of service as on 1st January, 1969 in B. P. Ms. No. 241, dated 28th March, 1969. The Board, therefore, relaxed the previous rule in favour of the emergency clerks and typists who had put in two years of satisfactory service as on 1st May, 1972. The appointing authorities were directed to regularize the services of all emergency lower division cle

      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 Back to top