Court ruled that repatriation orders of employees on deputation were arbitrary due to lack of formal cadre bifurcation, enforcing employee rights against selective discrimination.

ORDER :

A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J.

As the issue involved in all these writ petitions is one and the same, they are being heard together and disposed of by way of this Common Order.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are working as drivers/conductors/shramiks in various bus depots of the respondent Corporation in the State of Andhra Pradesh, but originally their parent regions are situated in the State of Telangana in TSRTC. All these petitioners claim to be the natives of State of Andhra Pradesh and their original appointment was in the State of Telangana. When matter stood thus, the 3rd respondent- Depot Managers in all the writ petitions issued letters dated 23.12.2016/15.06.2017/29.06.2017/30.06.2017 repatriating the petitioners to their parent regions in State of Telangana in TSRTC and some of the petitioners are being transferred. Aggrieved by the same, present writ petitions are filed.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that as on today, the respondent Corporation is not totally bifurcated and no such notification was issued till today; that a committee is examining the difficulties of the employees working in A.P and Telangana and the employees also submitted representation to the Managing Directors of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh for their retentions in the working places. It is stated that the employees who were appointed in the State of Telangana, working in the State of Andhra Pradesh on deputation were alone repatriated but the employees, who were appointed in the State of Andhra Pradesh, working in the State of Telangana State, on deputation were not repatriated. It is also asserted that they are ready to loose their seniority in the State of Telangana if they are to be treated as employees of the APSRTC (Andhra Pradesh), as they have been appointed in erstwhile APSRTC when it was undivided. It is also asserted that on 08.06.2017, a notification was issued to continue the employees of APSRTC on deputation, who belongs to APSRTC till 30.06.2018 in the State of Andhra Pradesh, as such, the impugned orders of the 3rd respondent repatriating the petitioners is illegal and arbitrary.

4. Counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents denying the averments in the affidavits filed in support of the writ petitions stating that some of the petitioners were appointed as drivers and conductors in Greater Hyderabad Zone and they belongs to the regions falling under Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) and they were transferred to different Regions in the State of Andhra Pradesh, on deputation for a period of one year and that their seniority is being maintained at their parent Region i.e, TSRTC. It is stated that the Executive Director (APSRTC), Vijayawada vide his letter dated 08.06.2017 has informed to repatriate all the employees of TSRTC who are working on deputation basis in the Units of APSRTC to their respective parent organizations on 30.06.2017. It was also informed that the employees of APSRTC who are working in TSRTC on deputation shall also be repatriated to APSRTC by 30.06.2017. As such, the petitioners were relieved by the impugned orders, to report to the Personal Officers, of different region of TSRTC on repatriation to their parent region. That deputation is purely on temporary basis and basing on vacancy position initially for a period of one year. Only on the representations of the petitioners for extension of deputation, the same was considered basing on vacancy position up to 30.06.2017. That the petitioners are not having any pre-existing right to continue their services in the APSRTC and that the posts of conductors and drivers are filled up by recruitment at region level against the sanctions of the particular Region by way of paper notificatio