An administrative authority cannot grant relaxations in mandatory qualifying service periods for promotion by transfer when such relaxation violates explicit service regulations. Training periods excluded by regulation from being counted for probation or increments cannot be retrospectively considered to satisfy eligibility criteria for promotion, rendering such promotions and seniority fixtures illegal.

Challenge in this Writ Petition is to the action of the 1st Respondent – Northern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited (NPDCL) in placing Petitioners below the unofficial Respondents 3 to 15 in the final seniority list in the category of Assistant Engineer (Electrical), dated 27.04.2017 as it is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to APSEB Service Regulations.

2. The case of petitioners is that, they possess B.E. (Electrical) degrees, applied for the post of Assistant Engineer in response to Notification dated 02.11.2001 issued by AP TRANSCO. Following a written examination and interview process, appointments were made on a yearly contract basis through proceedings dated 02.09.2002. The rank and allotment specifics have been detailed, highlighting, among others, petitioners’ allocation to A.P.N.P.D.C.L under BC-B, PH Roaster point in Backlog quota. After the fulfillment of a two-year contract, their services were regularized effective from 01.12.2004 vide proceedings dated 23.12.2004 under Regulation 14(a)(1) of APSEB Service Regulations Part-II as adopted by APNPDCL. The process dispensed with the need for an additional contract agreement.

2.1. While so, the unofficial respondents 3 to 15 were initially appointed as Trainee Sub-Engineers through proceedings dated 21.12.1999, joining in December 1999 and January 2000. After completing one-year training by January 2001 and obtaining B.E./B.Tech qualification, these respondents were promoted to Assistant Engineer (Electrical) posts by transfer, as per Northern Office Orders dated 21.04.2004, 29.04.2004 and 13.06.2005. Here, it is the case of petitioners, recruitment to Assistant Engineer posts occurs via direct recruitment and by transfer from Graduate Sub-Engineers. For recruitment by transfer, candidate must have four years of service as a Sub-Engineer or equivalent. This route is limited to 10% of recruitment events, with transferees to be ranked below the junior-most Assistant Engineer/Trainee at the time of appointment, a condition specifically established by B.P.Ms.No.354 dated 12.12.1994.

2.2. Both petitioners and unofficial respondents were recruited under APSEB Service Regulation Part II, with the latter initially considered junior to petitioners. This arrangement appeared in the provisional seniority list prepared on 04.01.2008, where directly recruited AEs of 2002 were listed from Sl.Nos. 2 to 72, with petitioners at 20, 41 and 59. Direct recruits of 2003 were shown at 74 to 98, and those appointed by transfer in April 2004 against the 2003 direct recruitment were at 99 to 111, as per B.P.Ms.No.354 dated 12.12.1994. Subsequently, APTRANSCO issued T.O.O. (Addl. Secy.Per) Ms. 231 dated 23.12.2008, stipulating that the contractual service rendered by Assistant Engineers until regularization was to be treated as regular service strictly for seniority fixation, excluding financial and pensionary benefits. The 04.01.2008 provisional seniority list was confirmed on 08.05.2009, maintaining the same positions even after objections, which were dismissed based on BP.Ms.No:354.

2.3. Aggrieved, some Assistant Engineers appointed by transfer challenged the list and T.O.O.No.231 dated 23.12.2008 by filing Writ Petitions No. 958, 1150 and 1151 of 2009. By the common order dated 18.10.2011, this Court ruled that appointments by transfer or promotion must occur concurrently with direct recruitment, regularizing contract service was permissible under regulations if appointments me