Employee remained in permanent establishment for a number of years’ service.

The petitioner prays for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the order of the District Revenue Officer, Cuddalore, in his proceedings No. A2-20883 of 1970, dated 23rd November, 1970 by which the petitioner, who was serving as Deputy Surveyor in the Survey Department, was reverted as Field Surveyor with immediate effect. The petitioner is a member of a Backward Glass (Hindu Agamudayar. Prior to the formation of the Andhra Pradesh State, the petitioner was recruited for survey training on 36th May, 1951 by the Officer-in-charge, Chittoor. After training, he was appointed temporarily as Field Surveyor on 16th July, 1951 and he was taken in the permanent establishment with effect from 1st August, 1951, but his services were not regularised by the Andhra Pradesh Government after its formation. The petitioner was promoted by the Andhra Pradesh Government as Deputy Surveyor on 10th February, 1960. The petitioner applied to the Tamil Nadu Government to be transferred to the services of the Tamil Nadu Government. By G.O. Ms. No. 837, Revenue, dated 16th March, 1965, the Tamil Nadu Government decided to take back the petitioner on three conditions, (!) that he would be taken as a Field Surveyor; (2) that he would take the last rank in the seniority list of Field Surveyors in the Tamil Nadu State and (3) that he would not be eligible for travelling allowance for his transfer to the Tamil Nadu State. The petitioner accepted these conditions and joined duty as Field Surveyor in the office of the Special Deputy Collector, Mettur Dam, on 14th June, 1965. One Murugesan, was also likewise transferred to the Tamil Nadu State by G.O. Ms. No. 2780, Revenue, dated 27th September, 1965. The petitioner joined duty in Tamil Nadu State before Murugesan joined duty. As the said Murugesan had been promoted as Deputy Surveyor, proceedings were issued by the Deputy Director of Survey and Land Records on 13th May, 1969 instructing the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Cuddalore, to promote the petitioner also as Deputy Surveyor as he had joined duty in the Tamil Nadu State earlier than Murugesan. For the purpose of declaring the probation of the petitioner, the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records addressed the corresponding officer in Chittoor. It appears that at the time the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Chittoor, stated that the petitioner did not possess the minimum general educational qualification. On verification of the S.S.L.C. book of the petitioner it was found that he had secured only 37 marks in English, which did not satisfy the minimum general educational qualification prescribed in Rule 12 of the General Rules for State and Subordinate Service Rules. It is after this fact was discovered, the impugned proceedings were issued reverting the petitioner as Field Surveyor. By the same proceedings, the petitioner was informed that he would continue in service under Rule 10 (a) (1) of the General Rules for State and Subordinate Service as Field Surveyor. The petitioner’s contention is that at no time he was informed that he did not possess the minimum general education qualification, that after having entertained him in service for nearly 20 years, it was wholly inequitable and unjust to revert him as Field Surveyor, and that too under Rule 10 (a) (1), that the respondent is estopped from passing the impugned order and that considerable prejudice is likely to be caused to the petitioner on account of the reversion order, which entails monetary loss also in addition to reduction in rank. His further submission is that the impugned order is vitiated in that he was not given a reasonable opportunity to show cause as to why the said order should not be passed.

2. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondent pointing out that at the time when the petitioner was appointed, he was not fully qualified, as he had secured only 37 marks in English whereas the minimum, according to rules was 40 m