HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

* * * *

Between:

The Government of Andhra Pradesh,

Rep.by its Principal Secretary,

School Education Department Secretariat,

Hyderabad and 3 others

.....PETITIONERS

AND

K. Satyanarayana and 5 others

.....RESPONDENTS

DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 24.06.2025

SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

&

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No

may be allowed to see the Judgments?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No

marked to Law Reporters/Journals

3. Whether Your Lordships wish to see the Yes/No

fair copy of the Judgment?

_______________________

RAVI NATH TILHARI, J

_______________________

CHALLA GUNARANJAN, J

* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI &

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN + WRIT PETITION No. 4962 of 2014 % 24.06.2025 Between:

The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others .....PETITIONERS AND K. Satyanarayana and 5 others .....RESPONDENTS ! Counsel for the Petitioners : Sri K. Ramalingeswara Rao GP for Services-II Counsel for the Respondents : Sri P. Veerabhadra Reddy < Gist :

> Head Note:

? Cases Referred:

1. (2008) 7 SCC 728

2. 2011 SCC OnLine Del 574

3. (2008) 2 SCC (L&S) 586

4. (1998) 5 SCC 246

5. 2025 SCC OnLine AP 1787

6. (2000) 8 SCC 182

7. 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 7726 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI &

THE HON’BL SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION No. 4962 of 2014 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)

Heard Sri K. Ramalingeswara Rao, learned Government Pleader for Services-II, for the petitioners and Sri P. Veerabhadra Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Respondents No.1 to 5 are the applicants in O.A.No.2069 of 2011 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (in short ‘the Tribunal’). They would be referred to as the ‘applicants’. The petitioners herein were the respondents No.1 to 4 in the O.A. and would be referred to as the ‘petitioners’.

3. The applicants had applied for the posts of School Assistant under DSC-2001. They were initially appointed to the post of School Assistant as per their merit in the selections. Some of the selected candidates were appointed in January, 2002. Subsequently, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.76, Education Department, dated 23.09.2002, directing the District Educational Officers (DEOs) to recast the selection list of DSC-2001 as per the judgment of the Tribunal in O.A.No.562 of 2002 and batch dated 22.07.2002. The DEOs had recasted the selection list, called the applicants for counseling in October, 2002 and issued posting Orders in October, 2002 and they joined as School Assistants in the same month, and since then, they had been working in those posts. The applicants could not be appointed along with those selectees who were appointed and joined in January, 2002 due to mis-interpretation of the provisions of the Presidential Order and finally, pursuant to the Order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.562 of 2002 they were given appointments in October, 2002. The applicants, thus, due to some irregularity in selection, could not be appointed in January, 2002 along with their batch-mates. They made representations to fix up their seniority on par with those who were appointed in January, 2002 as per their merit and ranking in the selection list, but no action was taken and at no point of time, seniority list of Teachers selected in DSC-2001 was communicated to the applicants. Later on, for effecting promotions to the next cadre, the petitioners were taking the date of joining of the applicants in October, 2002 as criteria for fixing up the seniority ignoring their merit and ranking in the selection list of DSC-2001. The applicants filed O.A.No.2069 of 2011. The Tribunal initially passed interim Order, directing the petitioners to dispose of the applicants’ representation and also to prepare seniority list in accordance with Rule 33 (b) of the Andhra Pradesh State