Telangana High Court
Md Jakir Hussain vs The Government Ofteianganu on 18 July, 2024
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI `DEVI
WRIT PETITION (TR) No.6197 of 2017
ORDER:
In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a declaration that the impugned proceedings dated 30.08.2015 of the respondent No.4-District Educational Officer, Adilabad, in rejecting the case of the petitioner for repatriation to his own District i.e., Warangal, without any application of mind, though he was identified as a non-local candidate in the earlier proposals forwarded to the respondent No.2- Commissioner and Director of School Education, State of Telangana, Hyderabad, as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of the principles of natural justice and to set aside the same and consequently, to direct the respondents to repatriate the petitioner to his native District of Warangal and to pass such other order or orders.
2 i). The brief facts leading to the filing of O.A. No.2988 of 2016 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, are that the petitioner was initially appointed as a 2 Secondary Grade Teacher on 19.01.1998 through DSC 1996 notification in non-local quota and he was posted to the Government High School-II, Adilabad District. It is submitted that later, the petitioner was promoted as a School Assistant (Bio-Science) on 26.06.2003 and he was posted to Zilla Parishad High School, Luxettipet, Adilabad District and he was again transferred to the Government High School, Old Kagaznagar, Adilabad on 11.11.2005 and from November 2005 the petitioner has been discharging his functions as a School Assistant (Bio-Science) in the said school.
2. ii) It is submitted that in the year 2002, some of the non- local teachers, who were appointed against the posts reserved for locals in DSC-1994 and 1996, were repatriated to their respective local cadres, vide G.O.Ms.Nos.119 and 120, School Education (Ser.V) Department, dated 18.12.2007. Aggrieved by the same, some of the candidates approached the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by filing OAs and the Full Bench of the Tribunal dismissed their OAs on 23.04.2012 3 against which, they filed writ petitions before this Court in W.P. No.13273 of 2012 and batch and they were partly allowed by orders dated 21.11.2012 by setting aside the impugned orders of the Tribunal and directing the respondents to redraw the list of teachers by applying 70% of reservation in vacancies for local candidates and 30% for open category in respect of teacher posts in all the recruitments made and finalized prior to 01.06.2001.
2. iii). It is submitted that after receipt of the said judgment of this Court, some of the candidates approached the respondent authorities for retention and some of them for repatriation. The respondent No.4, accordingly, prepared a list as per the orders of this Court and forwarded the same by proceedings dated 09.01.2014 to the respondent No.2 for compliance of the directions of this Court. In the said list, though the petitioner was not a party to the writ petition, his request was considered and his name was also included for repatriation to his native District i.e., at Table No.2 and Sl.No.8, but the respondents 4 did not take any action thereafter. Therefore, the petitioner has approached the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, by filing O.A.No.5969 of 2014 and vide order dated 14.10.2014, the Tribunal passed interim orders in the said O.A. directing the respondent No.2 to pass appropriate orders on the proposals forwarded by the respondent No.4. It is submitted that under the threat of Contempt Case only, the respondent No.2 issued the proceedings in Rc.No.2831/Ser.IV-2/2015, dated 12.03.2015, which were not in consonance with the proposals of the respondent No.4 or orders of the Administrative Tribunal, but the claim of the petitioner was rejected mentioning that the petitioner is now promoted as a School Assistant and therefore, he cannot be considered for repatriation.
2. iv) Challenging the orders of the respondent No.2, dated 12.03.2015, the petitioner has filed another O.A.No.3201 of 2015 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal. When the matter came up for admission, the Tribunal directed the 5 respondents to indicate as to how and why the promotion of the petitioner as a School Assistant is coming in the way of repatriation and despite granting of sufficient time, the respondents could not submit the information and therefore, the Tribunal passed interim orders on 05.08.2015 in the said O.A. directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for repatriation to his parent District i.e., Warangal and to pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of four weeks from date of receipt of a copy of the order. Thereafter, the respondent No.2 has passed the impugned order dated 30.08.2015 stating that the petitioner was erroneously shown and was appointed under 70% OC-G quota whereas, he should have been appointed under 30% BC-B quota. Therefore, according to the respondents, the petitioner was shown wrongly as a person selected under 70% OC-G quota and it is not possible now to repatriate the petitioner to his local district i.e., Warangal. Challenging the same, the present O.A.No.2988 of 2016 has been filed by the petitioner. 6 Thereafter, on abolition of the Administrative Tribunal by the Government, the said O.A. was transferred to this Court and it has been renumbered as WP (TR) No.6197 of 2017.
3. Heard Sri C. Rajasekhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services appearing for the respondents. Perused the material placed on record.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated the above submissions and has drawn the attention of this Court to various documents wherein the name of the petitioner has been shown as a local candidate of Warangal for repatriation to his native District of Warangal.
5. The learned Government Pleader for Services, appearing for the respondents, however, supported the impugned order of the respondent No.2 dated 30.08.2015 and also relied upon the averments made in the counter affidavit, which are in support of the interim orders. The learned Government Pleader also submitted that after passing the 7 interim orders in O.A.No.3201 of 2015, the respondent authorities have redrawn and re-verified the facts and in that process, it has come to their notice that the petitioner has been wrongly shown under 70% quota OC-G category, whereas he should have been considered under 30% BC-B non-local quota. It is submitted that in view of the above, the petitioner should be at Sl.No.361 (1) and 362, whereas the petitioner has been shown as Sl.No.274 and thus, it is not feasible to consider his case for repatriation to his native District of Warangal.
6. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material placed on record, this Court finds that the contentions raised by the respondents in the impugned order, which are supported by the averments made in the counter affidavit, clearly demonstrate that there is a mistake committed by the respondent authorities by showing the petitioner under 70% OC-G category. But, it is to be seen that it is not the mistake of the petitioner, and even if a mistake was committed by the 8 respondent authorities, the petitioner cannot be made to suffer on account of such mistake. Further, trying to place the petitioner at Sl.No.364 would also affect the seniority of the petitioner. The petitioner admittedly had joined the service in the year 1998 and at this late stage, if the seniority is to be revised, it could not have been done without issuing any notice to the petitioner. It is also noticed that the impugned proceedings have been issued without issuing any notice to the petitioner. Therefore, it is in blatant violation of the principles of natural justice. The stand taken by the respondent authorities in the earlier proceedings and in the impugned proceedings is at variance to each other and therefore, their stand cannot be sustained.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order of the respondent No.4 dated 30.08.2015 is hereby set aside and the respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders with regard to the repatriation of the petitioner to his native District of Warangal by retaining the 9 seniority at Sl.No.274 taking into consideration the proposals of the respondent No.4, dated 09.01.2014. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.
_____________________________ JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI Date: 18.07.2024 Isn