HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 9315 OF 2020

O R D E R:

Heard Sri P. Venkata Subba Rao, learned counsel for petitioners as well as learned Government Pleader for Prohibition & Excise and Sri Vadapalli Ramesh, learned counsel for Respondents 5 to 8.

2. This Writ Petition filed by petitioners is to declare the proceedings of Respondent No.1, vide Cr.NO.02/2018/CPE/B2 dated: 28-01-2020, whereby and whereunder Respondent No.2 was directed to re-fix seniority on the basis of merit, as without power or jurisdiction and also consequential proceedings of Respondent No.2 vide Proc Rc.No. 173/2012/P&E/A1 dated: June, 2020 is without any power or jurisdiction and contrary to the orders of this Court, the Respondent No.1 issued the impugned proceedings to prepare seniority list by considering the merit. The impugned proceedings are bad in law, in violation of principles of Natural Justice, contrary to law and unconstitutional.

3. It the case of Petitioners that they were initially appointed as A.P.S.P. Constables in 1995. Thereafter, they were deputed to work in Prohibition and Excise Department and was subsequently absorbed as Prohibition and Excise Constable, based on G.O.Ms. No. 1103 Revenue (Exercise-1) Department dated: 17-08-2007. Petitioners submitted their respective willingness for absorption as a Prohibition and Excise Constables and after their deputation on the strength of the order of the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise and after obtaining the options and willingness from Petitioners that he would abide by the seniority list. Petitioners were appropriately included in seniority list vide Cr. No. 1121/2006/P&E/Al dated 25.07.2015 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. The original instructions issued by Respondent No.1 vide proceedings Cr.No. 19/2020/CPE/B4 dated: 21.01.2020, expressly mandated the preparation of seniority lists after inviting objections and in strict compliance with the applicable service rules. However, the subsequent proceedings issued by Respondent No.1 vide Cr.No. 02/2018/CPE/B2 dated 28.01.2020, directing the re-fixation of seniority based on merit, constitutes deviation from the earlier lawful directions and lack of statutory or legal authority for their issuance.

4. It is further stated that the Department issued final seniority list after considering objections, vide proceedings Rc.No.173/2012/P&E/A1 dated: June, 2020, issued by the District Prohibition and Excise Officer, Khammam, Khammam District. The said final seniority list was published after due consideration of objections submitted by the concerned individuals. Respondent No.2 after receiving the proceedings dated 28-02-2020 from respondent No.1 prepared final seniority lists vide proceedings Rc.No.173/2012/P&E/A1 dated: June, 2020, after issuing provisional seniority list vide proceedings Rc.No.173/2012/P&E/A1 dated: June, 2020,, after obtaining objections from the effected parties by considering the merit lists instead of considering age criteria of the absorbed APSP Constables in to the Prohibition and Excise department. The APSP battalions have recruited the candidates on the basis of the Physical efficiency test and there is no parameter for concluding for the merit of the candidate.

5. Respondent No.2 in their counter affidavit stated that in 1995, approximately 2,200 Andhra Pradesh Special Armed Police (APSP) Constables were deputed to the State Excise Department, namely Prohibition and Excise Department. Subsequently, by G.O.Ms.No. 1103, Revenue (Excise-1) Department, dated 17.08.2007, Government directed absorption of 2,151 APSP Constables who were working on deputation in the Prohibition and Excise Department and declared surplus in the APSP. Such absorption was subject to adherence to the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organization of LocalCadre and Regulation of Direct Recruitme