The court ruled that terms referring to 'deputation' in employment must be interpreted as 'transfer', thus reinforcing seniority rights of employees post-bifurcation of states.

ORDER :

These two Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1^strespondent in issuing letter Nos.CMD/Dir(HR/DS (Estt) /AS (EStt)/174/2017-1, dated 05.01.2021, letter No.Dir (HR)/DS (Estt) AM(HR)/14/2020-1, dated 21.01.2021 to be bad in law and to quash or set aside the same. Consequently to direct 1st respondent to accept the request of the petitioners for being repatriated to the 1^st respondent- Corporation and grant promotion as Assistant Accounts Officer from the date on which his/her juniors stood promoted, as per seniority list, dated 10.05.2013. Further to grant all the benefit (seniority and monetary that would flow out of the reliefs and prayed to release the same together with interest at reasonable rate.

2. Heard Sri Goda Shiva, learned Senior Counsel, representing Smt. Goda Rama Lakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri B.Rajeshwar Reddy, learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of Sri P.Govind Reddy, learned counsel for the State of Andhra Pradesh- respondent No.2 and Sri G.Vidyasagar, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for respondent No.5.

3. Brief facts of the case in W.P.No.19988 of 2021 are as follows:

The petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Clerk on compassionate grounds on demise of her father. She reported to duty on 13.12.1995 and subsequently she was promoted as Junior Accounts Office (JAO) on 31.08.2010. Her seniority in the said cadre was maintained in the Seniority unit of Srisailam Left Bank Hydro Electrical Scheme. In the seniority list, she was shown at Sl.No.13. It is further stated that for considering the unit of the petitioner, the entire Corporation (APGENCO as it then was) would be the unit of appointment. The Seniority upto the JAOs would be Division-wise, and as such integrated seniority list is to be prepared for the purpose of determining the Zone of consideration for promoting JAOs and AAOs.

3(a). It is further stated that the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh was bifurcated and a new State of Telangana was formed by virtue of the Andhra Pradesh Re- organisation Act 2014, w.e.f. 02.06.2014. The erstwhile APGENCO issued order on 31.05.2014 allotting certain JAOs to work temporarily in APGENCO and TSGENCO.

3(b). It is further case of the petitioner that the respondents informed that where promotions are ordered in parent department of persons who are sent on ‘deputation’ would be considered commonly called the ‘next below rule’. However, treating the petitioner to be permanently moved out of TSGENCO promotion orders of Assistant Accounts Officers was published on 13.06.2017. Meanwhile, the provisional seniority list of JAOs was drawn by APGENCO on 26.10.2020 and the petitioner’s name was not included therein. The objections were called for and the petitioner submitted her representation to include her name in the seniority list of JAOs, by APGENCO or repatriate her to parent unit i.e., TSGENCO.

3(c). On 21.01.2021, the TSGENCO has issued proceedings dated 21.01.2021 stating that the term ‘deputation’ is not contemplated in regulations in vogue for transfer/allotment of employees from one place to another within the organization and for allocation of the employees between two entities based on their nativity. Finally, the order stated that her original transfer Memo dated 31.05.2014 cannot be considered as ‘deputation’ and issuing of orders for repatriation of her services from APGENCO to TSGENCO at this length of time is not correct.

4. Brief facts of