THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.23394 of 2019 AND WRIT PETITION Nos.13595 and 23094 of 2020

COMMON ORDER:

The petitioners, who are rendering services as Work Inspector Grade-I, have been reverted to their earlier postwith retrospective effect, on the ground that they were illegally promoted, and that they do not have requisite technical qualification when they were initially promoted decades ago.

2. In view of the commonality of issue and grievance, the writ petitions are taken up for disposal by way of this Common Order. For reference and discussion, the facts in W.P.No.23394 of 2019 are taken.

3. Petitioner No.1 was appointed as Man-Mazdoor (manual worker) in the 3^rdrespondent-Irrigation & Command Area Development Department in 1986, and petitioner No.2 in 1987. Subsequently, they obtained promotions as Work Inspector Grade-IV, and later Grade-III, and so on, ultimately as Work Inspector Grade-I in the year 2007. On an anonymous complaint dated 13.08.2018 received by the 2^nd respondent/Engineer-in-Chief stating that the petitioners do not have the technical qualification certificate from the year 1992 onwards, a Memo dated 14.06.2019 was issued to the petitioners (and also to certain retired personnel). The petitioners submitted a detailed representation dated 20.08.2019 by referring to the Order dated 29.01.2008 passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.3138 of 2004, in a similarly situated case of one Mr. Reddy Papi Naidu, Work Inspector, and the writ petition W.P.No.7559 of 2008 filed by the respondent authorities against the Order dated 29.01.2008 in OA.No.3138 of 2024, was dismissed by this Court by order dated 08.04.2008. It is the contention of the petitioners that they too are on the verge of retirement, and therefore the impugned action of reversion to earlier post, after decades of service, is illegal.

4. Heard Mr. C. Rajasekhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners; and learned Government Pleader for Services-I. Perused the record.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while making submissions on the lines of writ affidavit, would contend that the petitioners were promoted way back during 1989 & 1996 as Work Inspector Grade-IV, and subsequently they obtained further promotions, and the action of the authorities in reverting the petitioners to earlier post, after decades of service, that too on the verge of their retirement of is illegal.

6. Learned Government Pleader, based on the counter affidavit, would contend that on the complaint received by the authorities that the petitioners do not have necessary technical qualification at the initial stage of promotion in the year 1992, the matter was examined and it was found that the promotion of petitioners is illegal as they do not haverequired technical qualification to serve in the promoted grade. Therefore, they have been reverted to the lower Grade, commensurate with their qualifications. It is contended that the authorities are now taking action by considering the eligibility criteria, as the earlier promotions were not given on merit/eligibility but due to the arbitrary action which went unnoticed for years. It is contended that when other employees approached the respondent authorities for promotion (seeking similar dispensation as that of the petitioners), the authorities denied such requests for promotion on the ground of qualification, and therefore, there is no illegality in the action of the respondent authorities in reverting the petitioners to earlier posts, as the impugned action has been taken to correct/rectify the earlier illegality and arbitrariness.

7. Having considered the respective submissions and perused the record, it may be noted that the petitioners were appointed during 1986/1987 as man-mazdoor (manual labour) in the respondent- Department. Even as per the counter affidavit, the petitioner No.1 has SSC + ITI qualification (and hence eligible for Work Inspector Grade-III position), and petitioner No.2