Judgment

BHAGWATI, C.J.I. :- These Writ Petitions challenge the constitutional validity of Cl. (5) of Art. 371-D, of the Constitution. Though originally when the writ petitions were filed, the constitutional validity of Cl. (3) of Art. 371-D was also assailed, this challenge was not pressed on behalf of the petitioners and the arguments were confined only to the challenge against the constitutional validity of Cl. (5) of that Article. But in order to understand the true scope and ambit of the controversy raised before us in regard to the constitutional validity of Cl. (5), it is necessary for us to refer also to the provision enacted in Cl. (3) of Art. 371-D. Cls. (3) and (5) of Art. 371-D read as follows :-

"The President may, by order, provide for the Constitution of an Administrative Tribunal for the State of Andhra Pradesh to exercise such jurisdiction, powers and authority including any jurisdiction, power and authority which immediately before the commencement of the Constitution (Thirty-Second Amendment) Act, 1973, was exercisable by any Court (other than the Supreme Court) or by any Tribunal or other authority as may be specified in the order with respect to the following matters, namely :-

(A) to (C) .....................................

(5) The order of the Administrative Tribunal finally disposing of any case shall become effective upon its confirmation by the State Government or on the expiry of three months from the date on which the order is made, whichever is earlier;

Provided that the State Government may, by special order made in writing for reasons to be specified therein, modify or annul any order of the Administrative Tribunal before it becomes effective and in such a case, the order of the Administrative Tribunal shall have effect only in such modified form or be of no effect, as the case may be."

Article 371-D was introduced in the Constitution by the Constitution (Thirty-second Amendment) Act, 1973 which came into force with effect from 1st July 1974. The genesis of this Amendment made in the Constitution by introduction of Art. 371-D lay in the formation of the State of Andhra Pradesh on 1st November, 1956. The State of Andhra Pradesh was constituted of portions of territories drawn from the erstwhile States of Andhra and Hyderabad. The territories from the erstwhile State of Hyderabad which were included in the State of Andhra Pradesh commonly known as the Telengna area. Before the territories of the Telengana area were amalgamated with the other territories to form the State of Andhra Pradesh, there was a set of rules known as the Mulki Rules in operation in the Telengana area under the regime of the Nizam of Hyderabad and these rules provided for residential clarification for all public employment. Soon after the formation of the State of Andhra Pradesh Parliament enacted Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957 making special provision for requirement as to residence for public employment and brought it into force with effect from 21st March, 1957. The constitutional validity of this Act was challenged by some of the persons employed in the ministerial services of the Andhra Pradesh Government in Narasimha Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1970) 1 SCR 115: (AIR 1970 SC 422) and this Court by its judgment dated 28th March, 1969 held S. 3 of this Act in so far as it related to the Telengana are ultra vires Cl. (3), Art. 16 of the Constitution. This Court, however, left open the question whether in view of the constitutional invalidity of this Act the Mulki Rules existing in the Telengana area could be said to be continuing in force by virtue of Art. 35(b) of the Constitution. This question, however, came up for consideration before this Court in Director of Industries and Commerce v. V. V. Reddy, (1973) 2 SCR 562 : (AIR 1973 SC 827). This Court held that the Mulki Rules continued in force even after the formation of the State of Andhra Pradesh under Art. 35(b) of the Constitution. Meanwhile,