Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
NYAPATHY VIJAY
K. Raja Gopal – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. eligibility for section officer vacancies (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding appointment guidelines (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. interpretation of appointment rules and judicial precedence (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. court's directive for considering applicants (Para 16) |
ORDER :
1. The present writ petition is filed to declare the action of the Respondents in not filling up the first vacancy in the cadre of "Section Officer" in A.P. Secretariat from the cadre of Superintendent working in the Head of Departments as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to Note-5, Rule 3 of A.P. Secretariat Service Rules, 1998 and for consequential directions.
2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as under:
The Petitioner No.1 was initially appointed as Typist (R&B) in the Office of Engineer-in-Chief (R&B), Errumanzil, Hyderabad and subsequently was promoted as Senior Assistant (R&B) in the year 2009 and further promoted as Superintendent (R&B) on 01.07.2020. Petitioner No.2 was initially appointed as Attender and subsequently promoted as Typist, Senior Assistant and thereafter as Superintendent on 01.06.2021. The grievance of the Petitioners is that Rule 2 o
Fixed quotas for recruitment cannot be overridden by administrative decisions, affirming the supremacy of statutory provisions over executive instructions.
Quota-rota ratio in special rules for direct recruits and transferees must be applied vacancy-wise, not cadre-wise; excess transferee appointments against direct quota illegal and confer no seniority....
The court affirmed that cancellations of appointment orders must be substantiated by legitimate reasons, emphasizing the right to career advancement and upholding statutory channels for appointments.
The appointment by transfer as Assistant Section Officer must follow statutory channels, and cancellation based on manpower issues cannot justify denying employment.
The Chief Justice has the discretion to relax qualifications for appointment to the Secretary's post, and judicial review does not permit substituting the Chief Justice's discretion unless arbitrary.
The court affirmed that recruitment quotas fixed by law cannot be altered by executive powers, ensuring adherence to established legal principles.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an employee cannot compel the employer to grant promotion if the Government's decision is supported by valid reasons and is not arbitrary.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
