SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 65359

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Aparesh Kumar Singh, CJ, G.M. Mohiuddin, J
Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University – Appellant
Versus
M. Sneha – Respondent
Writ Appeal Nos. 1110 and 1186 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: A.Sudarshan Reddy, G.Siva, Smt. L.Pranathi Reddy
For the Respondents: J.Sudheer

In the absence of specific recruitment rules, the highest executive body of a university is empowered to prescribe feeder cadres through resolutions. General enabling provisions in statutes regarding recruitment do not authorize inter-service transfers that bypass established administrative hierarchy and service structures.

Headnote:(A) Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Act, 1972 - Statute XIV - Clause 12 - Writ Appeal - Appointment to Administrative Service - Eligibility - Determination of feeder cadre - Executive Council resolutions - Appointment of Assistant Registrar - Writ petitioner, a Technical Assistant, sought transfer to Administrative Service - University rejected request based on settled practice designating Superintendent as feeder cadre - High Court held Clause 12 is a general enabling provision and does not confer an inherent right of transfer across distinct service cadres - Executive Council is empowered to formulate policy and determine feeder cadres in absence of specific statutory recruitment rules - Judicial review in policy matters is limited to preventing arbitrariness or illegality - Impugned order set aside (Paras 14-22).

Facts of the case:
The writ petitioner was appointed as a Junior Assistant, subsequently transferred to Technical Assistant Grade-I. She sought promotion/transfer to the post of Assistant Registrar. The Executive Council of the University resolved that she was ineligible, as the post of Assistant Registrar is filled by promotion from the post of Superintendent. The learned Single Judge initially allowed the writ petition, directing the University to consider her eligibility, leading to the present appeals.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that Clause 12 of Statute XIV does not permit free-flowing inter-service transfers. Administrative practice and resolutions designating the post of Superintendent as the sole feeder cadre for the Administrative Service are valid and functional. The petitioner's reliance on Rule 8 of the State and Subordinate Service Rules was rejected as those rules do not create a substantive right to lateral transfer without conforming to institutional frameworks.

Issues: Whether the writ petitioner had a right to be considered for transfer to the Administrative Service based on Statute XIV and whether the University's policy of prescribing specific feeder cadres for administrative posts is legally sound.

Ratio Decidendi: General provisions (Clause 12) do not override specific administrative practice or policy decisions of the Executive Council regarding cadre hierarchies, and judicial review cannot be used to force appointment processes that circumvent established institutional service structures.

Result: Appeals allowed.

Table of Content
1. factual background leading to the writ appeal challenge. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
2. arguments regarding eligibility and scope of statute xiv. (Para 11 , 12)
3. interpretative hierarchy of statutes versus administrative policy and cadre structure. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
4. final order setting aside the lower court judgment. (Para 24 , 25)

COMMON JUDGMENT:

Since the issues that arise in the above writ appeals are integrally one and the same, the writ appeals are being disposed of by this Common Judgment.

2. These Writ Appeals are directed against the judgment dated 06.03.2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.8455 of 2022.

3. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the writ petition viz., W.P.No.8455 of 2022.

4. W.A.No.1110 of 2024 is filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 in the subject writ petition.

5. W.A.No.1186 of 2024 is filed by respondent No.3 in the subject writ petition.

6. The writ petitioner is respondent No.1 in both the appeals.

7. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner and directed respondent No.1 (Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (JNTU)) to consider her eligibility for the post of Assistant Registrar; and if the petitioner was found more meritorious and suitable than respondent No.2 in the writ petition, to take necessary action in accordance with law.

8. Heard Sri A.Sudarshan Reddy, learned Advocate General for the State of Telangana on behalf of the appellants-JNTU and its Executive Council (respondents Nos.1 and 2 in the writ petition) in W.A.No.1110 of 2024 and respondent Nos.2 and 3 in W.A.No.1186 of 2024; Sri J.Sudheer, learned counsel for respondent No.1; Sri G.Siva, learned Senior Counsel representing Smt. L.Pranathi Reddy learned counsel for the appellant in W.A.No.1186 of 2024 and respondent No.2 in W.A.No.1110 of 2024 and perused the record.

Factual Matrix (in brief)

9. The factual background, necessary for the adjudication of this appeal, is as follows:

i. The writ petitioner was initially appointed as a Junior Assistant in the Ministerial Service of respondent No.1-University on compassionate grounds in the year 2008.

ii. In the year 2011, pursuant to an internal notification, the writ petitioner was appointed by transfer to the post of Technical Assistant Grade-I, which falls under the Subordinate (Technical) Service.

iii. The writ petitioner passed several departmental tests conducted by the Telangana State Public Service Commission (for short ‘TSPSC’). Believing herself to be eligible, the writ petitioner made a representation dated 09.11.2020 seeking promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Assistant Registrar, which is classified under the Administrative Service.

iv. The Executive Council of respondent No.1-University, in its 55th meeting held on 18.01.2021, resolved that writ petitioner was not eligible for transfer from Subordinate Service (Technical) to Administrative Service. The same was communicated to the writ petitioner. Subsequently, respondent No.3 was promoted from the post of Superintendent (a post in the Ministerial Service) to the post of Assistant Registrar. The relevant portion of the minutes of the 55th meeting held on 18.01.2021 order is extracted as under:

Resolution:

The Council has examined the item and resolved that Smt.M.Sneha, Technical Assistant Grade-I is not eligible for transfer of service from Subordinate Service (Technical) to Administrative Service.

Further resolved to sanction the EoL for the B. Tech. study perlod as she has completed her B.Tech. In day time.

Also resolved to write a letter to the Government for ratification of the University orders for her appointment by transfer as Technical Assistant Grade - I as suggested by the State L.F. Audit.

10. Being aggrieved by the action of respondent No.1-University in rejecting her application and appointment of res

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top