IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT APPEAL No.221 of 2026 DATED: 24.02.2026 Between:

M.Jai Singh S/o. M.Narayan Singh ... Appellant AND The State of Telangana Rep. by its Principal Secretary Home Police SPF Department, Secretariat Hyderabad & 3 others ... Respondents JUDGMENT:

Heard Mr. K.Anantha Rao, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/writ petitioner through video conference and Mr. B.Krishna, learned Government Pleader for Services (Home) appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. The Memorandum dated 26.08.2016 is on the subject of final allocation of the employees/seniority in respect of Head Constables under the Telangana Special Protection Force (TSPF) where the name of the appellant ranks at Serial No.182. He first made a representation in the year 2021 against fixation of his seniority which was rejected by the order dated 12.01.2022 holding that the seniority of 1994 Batch Constables were finalised by DG AP SPF on 19.05.2014 which is before the reorganisation of the Andhra Pradesh State. As per the Government of Telangana Circular dated 27.05.2015, the seniority list as on 01.06.2014 shall be taken into account while determining the seniority in Telangana. Therefore, the claim to fix the seniority of Constables appointed in Andhra Pradesh SPF in the year 1994 by applying different Rule cannot be taken up by the Telangana SPF. The request was earlier considered and rejected by DG TSPF vide Memo dated 03.01.2018. It further indicated that finalisation of seniority is subject to final outcome of the Court cases that are pending or going to arise in future.

3. It appears that earlier the representation of the appellant on the seniority of Head Constables vide reference dated 02.04.2014 was rejected holding that the seniority of Constable and seniority of Head Constable cannot be matched. The seniority of Head Constable is prepared based on the directions recorded who have clean record of service duly following Rule of Reservation with effect from 2003. Hence, the Serial Number in the Constable Seniority cannot be matched with the Serial Number in the Head Constable Seniority. Thereafter the seniority in the rank of Head Constable were finalised by issuance of the final seniority list on 26.08.2016. The appellant approached the writ Court after six years in the year 2022 of publication of the Seniority List on 26.08.2016 assailing the proceedings dated 12.01.2022 whereby his request for revision of seniority was rejected, referred to hereinabove. The learned writ Court taking into account the pleadings on record including the counter affidavit of the respondents held that the issue of seniority should not be allowed to be unsettled at that point of time. The appellant had not challenged the seniority list after its issuance in 2016. The learned writ Court followed the decision in the case of B.S. Bajwa v. State of Punjab, (1998) 2 SCC 523 (para 7). The appellant being aggrieved preferred this writ appeal.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and taken into account the materials placed on record.

5. The issue of seniority has been sought to be reopened by the appellant after six years of its issuance. Earlier also, his representation for matching the seniority in the rank of Constable with that of Head Constable was rejected in 2014. The matter had become final in absence of any challenge. The learned writ Court was, therefore, right in refusing to interfere in the matter since several rights of other persons in the seniority list could get affected on reopening it after the lapse of reasonable period. We do not find any error in the impugned order.

6. Accordingly, the instant Writ Appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

______________________________________

APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ _____________________