Back
2024 Supreme(AP) 699
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, C.J., R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, JJ.
P.V. Satish Kumar, S/o. Sri P. Krishna Murthy – Appellant
Versus
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh – Respondents
W.P.No.21696 of 2022
Decided on : 22-08-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sri M. Vijaya Kumar, Sr. Counsel Representing Sri B. Manoj Kumar
For the Respondent: Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar S.C. for APHC
IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that unilateral administrative decisions affecting employee allocation require proper jurisdiction and consent from relevant authorities.
Headnote:
Judicial Review - Seniority - High Court Allocation - The court discussed the principles of natural justice and jurisdiction regarding the allocation of employees post bifurcation of the High Court, emphasizing the need for proper procedures and consent in administrative decisions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, after being allocated to the High Court of Telangana, was deputed to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh due to excess staff. He contested the seniority fixation after being reallocated, claiming it violated his rights.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the reallocation order was issued unilaterally by the High Court of Telangana without the consent of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, and thus the petitioner could not challenge it in the current jurisdiction.
Issues: Whether the petitioner could challenge the reallocation order issued by the High Court of Telangana in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the legality of the seniority fixation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the reallocation order was valid as it was issued by the appropriate authority in Telangana, and the petitioner must seek redress in the proper jurisdiction.
Result: The writ petition is dismissed, allowing the petitioner to seek appropriate remedies in the correct forum.
ORDER :
(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)
Heard Sri M. Vijaya Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Manoj Kumar Bethapudi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2.
2. The petitioner herein had joined as an Assistant, on 26.04.2004, in the combined High Court of Andhra Pradesh. After various promotions, in the year 2018, he had been working as a Deputy Section Officer. By this time, there had been a bifurcation of the erstwhile composite State of Andhra Pradesh into the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh. Consequent to this bifurcation, the employees of the High Court were also required to give their options, as to whether they would serve in the High Court of Telangana or the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, as and when the combined High Court was bifurcated. The guidelines for making such options were set out vide Roc.No.615/SO/RO/2014 dated 01.11.2018, issued by the Registrar General of the combined High Court. The petitioner had initially opted for the High Court of Telangana and, by proceedings dated 31.12.2018, had been allotted to the said High Court.
3. Though, the petitioner had been allotted to the High Court of Telangana, he was deputed to work in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh as Deputy Section Officer. This deputation was caused by the fact that the number of Deputy Section officers, who had opted to serve in the High court of Telangana, was more than the available posts. As such, the petitioner was deputed to work in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
4. In pursuance of the said deputation, the petitioner reported for duty at the High Court of Andhra Pradesh on 04.01.2019. Thereafter, the petitioner, on 10.01.2019, addressed a letter to the Registrar (Administration), High Court for the State of Telangana, requesting for reallocation to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, instead of the High Court for the State of Telangana, after retaining his seniority in the cadre of Deputy Section Officer, in the composite High Court at Hyderabad. The Registrar (Administration), High Court for the State of Telangana, on 18.01.2019, issued proceedings bearing Roc.No.607/D/Estt./2019, modifying the initial allocation proceedings and reallocated about 12 officials of the High Court for the State of Telangana to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, as requested by the said persons. The petitioner was shown at Sl.No.8 of the said list of such officers/employees.
5. This reallocation done by the Registrar (Administration), High Court for the State of Telangana, was accepted by the proceedings of the Registrar (Administration), High Court of Andhra Pradesh, bearing Roc.No.78/2019-Estt., dated 01.03.2019. In this manner, the petitioner was allocated to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and continued to work as a Deputy Section Officer in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The very same proceedings also stipulated that the 12 persons mentioned in the proceedings dated 01.03.2019, would be placed at the bottom of the employees, who had already been allocated to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, in their respective cadres for the purpose of reckoning their seniority.
6. The petitioner being aggrieved by such fixation of seniority, made a representation to the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice, High Court of Andhra Pradesh on 08.03.2019 seeking protection of their seniority in the combined High Court. This representation was rejected by the Registrar (Administration), High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide proceedings Roc.No.170/2019/Estt/18, dated 18.04.2019. This order of rejection was passed in view of the report of the Special Committee, which had been approved by the Full Court on 13.02.2019.
7. This decision, relating to fixation of seniority of the petitioner and other 11 persons mentioned above, was challenged by way of W.P.No. 8652 of 2019 filed by the writ petitioner herein along with 18 others. In this
