HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

WRIT PETITION No. 24941 OF 2019

O R D E R:

Heard Sri P.V. Krishnaiah, learned counsel for

petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Services-I on behalf of Respondents 1 to 3, learned Government Pleader for Services- III on behalf of Respondent No.4, Sri R.V. Mallikarjuna Rao, learned counsel for Respondent No.6 and Sri G. Vidyasagar, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of Ms. K. Udaya Sri, learned

counsel for Respondents 10 to 14.

2. This Writ Petition filed assailing the Proceedings dated 28.08.2019 issued by the 1^st Respondent and Proceedings dated 16.09.2019 and consequential proceedings dated 26.10.2019 issued by the 2^nd Respondent. A consequential direction is sought to Respondents to forthwith consider the cases of Petitioners for promotion to the Post of Prohibition and Excise Head Constable as per seniority list prepared by the 2^nd Respondent by Proceedings dated 04.05.2015 in the existing

vacancies.

3. It the case of Petitioners that they were initially appointed as A.P.S.P. Constable at 9^th battalion at Guntur District. Thereafter, they were deputed to work in Prohibition

and Excise Department and subsequently absorbed as Prohibition and Excise Constables based on G.O.Ms. No. 1103 dated 17-08-2007. Petitioners submitted their respective willingness for absorption as Prohibition and Excise Constable and after their deputation on the strength of the order of the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, and after obtaining options and willingness from Petitioners that they would abide by the seniority list. Petitioners were appropriately included in the seniority list for promotion to the post of Head Constable, based on the existing seniority list, wherein the date of absorption and age were adopted as the determining criteria. Original instructions issued by Respondent No.1 vide proceedings dated 28.08.2009 issued by the 1st Respondent wherein the 1st Respondent allowed appeal/representation made by the party Respondents against the final seniority list issued by the 2^nd Respondent, by Proceedings dated 04.05.2015, directing the 2^nd Respondent to revise seniority list in the cadre of Excise Constables of Ranga Reddy District on the so-called marks/merit list obtained by the APSP Constables at the time of recruitment as APSP Constables in 1985, even though there is no state-wide merit list of APSP Constables not only at the time of recruitment but also even prior to issuing the impugned proceedings by the 1^st respondent and admittedly, the constables, who were appointed in battalions in 1985, were absorbed as Excise Constables in Excise Department on 28.05.2009 and determined their seniority based on the age as criterion as all the APSP Constables absorbed in the 10 Excise Department on the same day, i.e., 28.05.2009 in the combined state of Andhra Pradesh and also seek to impugn the consequential proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent by proceedings dated 16.09.2019, directing Petitioners to submit their objections/explanations for the proposed revision of seniority based on merit/marks as directed by the 1^st Respondent by proceedings dated 28.08.2019 which are impugned in this writ petition.

4. Earlier, the APSP Battalion issued Notification for recruitment of APSP PC, State of Andhra Pradesh dated 06.07.1994 to fill up the AP Special Armed Police Constabulary posts and notified 3,000 vacancies of APSP Constable posts in 9 battalions i.e., 320, 380, 320, 320, 320, 320. 320, 320 and 380 respectively from 1 to 9 battalions, wherein it is categorically stated that for appointment to the post of APSP Police Constables, battalion is the unit of appointment. The selection made based on the unit treating battalion as a separate and distinct unit and therefore, the authorities ought to have made selections for 9 battalions separately and prepared selection list i.e. list of selected candidates appointed in particular battalion for each battalion i.e. 9 battalions separately. Petitioners were