The court upheld the validity of the final seniority list, affirming compliance with the A.P. Reorganization Act and the One Man Committee's directives, while emphasizing the need for adherence to principles of natural justice.

ORDER :

As the issue involved in all the writ petitions is one and the same, and therefore, they are being taken up for hearing as well as disposed of by way of this Common Order.

2. The WP Nos.9996, 11089 of 2021 are filed challenging the Memo of the 2^nd respondent in Memo No. APCPDCL/CMD/DIR(TECH)/GM(HR)/DGM/ PO(Adm)/ Asst./D.No.992/21, dated 17.03.2021 unsettling petitioners’ settled seniority basing upon the seniority in the Cadre of Assistant Engineer instead of taking into consideration of the Seniority in the cadre of the Deputy Executive Engineer as the same is arbitrary and illegal.

3. Whereas WP No.11476 of 2021 is filed calling for the records including the impugned proceedings of the 2^nd respondent Memo No CMD/CGM/HRD/JS/HR/GM/HR/DGM(Trg.)/JPO.I/D.No.337/21, dated 03.04.2021 of final integrated seniority list of Executive Engineers/Electrical of the 2nd respondent company is contrary to Rule 7(6)(c) of AP Electricity Reforms (Transfer Scheme) Rules 1999 as well as contrary to A.P.S.EB Special Service Regulation 10 of Part III Note iii & iv contrary to Section 78 & 82 of Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, Tripartite Agreement dated 09.09.1997, the Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court for composite State of Andhra Pradesh W.P.No. 10726 of 2002 & batch, dated 30.11.2004 contrary to supplementary report of one man committee of Justice Dharmidhikari, Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and quash the same as illegal; and

4. W.P.No.29140 of 2023 is filed calling for all connected records including the impugned Proceedings of the 2nd Respondent in Memo No. CMD/CGM(HRD)/JS(HR)/GM(P)/DGM(P)/PO(P)/JPO.AI/D.No. 409/23, dated 31.08.2023 of tin integrated seniority list of Deputy Executive Engineers/Electrical of the 2^nd Respondent Company contrary to Rule 7(6)(e) of AP Electricity Reforms (Transfer Scheme) Rules 1999 as well as contra to Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Special Service Regulation 10 of Part III Note iii&iv, contrary to Section 78 & 82 of Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, Tripartite Agreement dated 09.09.1997, the Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court for composite State of Andhra Pradesh W.P.No. 10726 of 2002 & batch, dated 30.11.2004 contrary to supplementary report of one man committee of Justice Dharmidhikari, Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and quash the same as illegal.

5. Since the facts in all the writ petitions are similar and identical, therefore WP No.11089 of 2021 is taken as lead case, and the facts therein hereinafter will be referred to for convenience.

6. Brief facts of the case are that, initially all the writ petitioners appointed in erstwhile Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board (APSEB) in the cadre of Assistant Engineer (AE) and all the employees including the petitioners’ service were under the control of APSEB. Pursuant to introduction of electricity reforms, the A.P. State has enacted A.P. Electricity Reforms Act 1998 (for short “the Act”), which provided for formation of separate companies for Generation, Transmission, and Distribution by unbundling the activities of the board. Therefore, the APSEB was divided into A.P.Transmission Corporation and A.P. Generation Corporation with effect from 01.02.1999. The A.P.Genco was entrusted with the activity of power generation and A.P. Transco was with transmission, distribution and supply of electricity.It is stated that from 01.04.2000, the A.P. Transco was further unbundled with the incorporation of 4 distribution companies (i.e.,) Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Company limited(APCPDCL), Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company limited(APSPDCL), Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Company limited(APEPDCL), Andhra Pradesh Northern Power Distribution Company limited(APNPDCL) and thereby the activities of distribution and supply was vested with these companies, and the activity of transmission was retained with the AP Transco. The employees working under APSEB were allotted on permanent basis unde