Telangana High Court
Dr. Santhosh Kumar Khesari vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh, on 25 June, 2025
Author: P.Sam Koshy
Bench: P.Sam Koshy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
WRIT PETITION No.12132 OF 2025
ORDER:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy) Heard Mr.A.Phani Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Santhapur Satyanarayana, learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for respondent Nos.2, 4, 6 and Mr. B. Rajeshwar Reddy, learned Government Pleader for the State Andhra Pradesh, appearing for respondent Nos.1, 3 & 5. Perused the material available on record.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking for the following relief:
"to issue Writ, Order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not assigning the notional seniority to the petitioners on par with the first phase candidates w.e.f 14-06-2013, thereby depriving the petitioners for the benefits of revised pay scales of 2015 and 2020 at par with first phase candidates pursuant to Notification No.01/ RMSA/Model Schools/2012, dated.06-02-2012 as arbitrary, illegal, unjust, contrary to the provisions of Rule 33(b) of the Telangana State and Subordinate Service Rules,1996 and violation of Article 14, 16, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India besides being contrary to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in in Civil Appeal No. 9103 and 9104 of 2013, dated 16-03-2018 and Judgment of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.Nos.36093 and 35011 of 2022 dated 17-11-2022 and consequently hold that the petitioners are entitled to assign the notional seniority on par with the first phase candidates w.e.f.14-06-2013 in accordance with Rule 33(b) Page 2 of 9 and 36 (i) of the Telangana State and Subordinate Service Rules,1996 as observed and directed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.Nos.36093 and 35011 of 2022 dated 17-11-2022 and W.P.No.4873 of 2025 dated 02-04-2025in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in in Civil Appeal No. 9103 and 9104 of 2013, dated 16-03-2018 pursuant to the Notification No.01/RMSA/Model Schools/2012, dated.06-02-2012 and to extend the benefits of Revised Pay Scales 2015 and 2020 at par with first phase candidates with all consequential benefits including the arrears of salary and increments thereof and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper".
3. The grievance of the petitioners in a nutshell is that pursuant to an order passed by the Division Bench of this High Court in W.P.Nos.36093 & 35011 of 2022, decided on 17.11.2022, the respondents were specifically directed to draw a combine merit list of direct recruits of 2012 by interspersing Telugu Medium and English Medium Post Graduate teachers and then determine inter se seniority of direct recruits based on the merit secured by each of the candidates without regards to the date of joining and the roster point of reservation.
4. Admittedly, the aforesaid judgment of this High Court dated 17.11.2022 by efflux of time has attained finality. The Government of Telangana also has principally accepted the said judgment to be binding upon the department so far as the implementation of the instructions/directions given in the said judgment is concerned. Page 3 of 9
5. In the process, as a consequence of the disposal of those two writ petitions, the respondents were required to publish a fresh seniority list consisting of candidates belonging to the two mediums and inter se seniority was required to be provided in terms of the merit secured by each of the candidates in the selection process.
6. Down the line, the grievance of the petitioners as on date is that the seniority list that the respondent/State of Telangana has now prepared would provide the seniority to the petitioners in accordance with the orders passed in the aforesaid two writ petitions.
7. However, for the reason that the persons who had given joining on earlier period i.e., the first batch having joined on 14.06.2013 were drawing more salary than the petitioners herein, even though the seniority has been rectified and the petitioners were granted seniority at par with the first batch of candidates.
8. It is this disparity in the pay between the two set of candidates who were granted seniority from the same date of joining of the first batch i.e., 14.06.2013 which has led to the filing of the present writ petition.
9. The two Governments i.e., the State of Andhra Pradesh as also the State of Telangana have filed their respective counters. The State of Andhra Pradesh has washed their hand off in their counter stating Page 4 of 9 that the granting of seniority and the pay in the instant case is exclusively within the domain of the State of Telangana as all the petitioners are working in the State of Telangana and therefore, there is no liability or responsibility as such casted upon the State of Andhra Pradesh.
10. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the State of Telangana fairly conceded that they are bound by the decision of the Division Bench of this High Court in W.P.Nos.36093 & 35011 of 2022 which stands decided on 17.11.2022. He further contends that in terms of the directions in the said judgment of the Division Bench of this High Court as also in term of Rule 33(B) of the State Sub-Ordinate Service Rules 1996, the inter se seniority between the two set of candidates have been rectified and the petitioners have also been granted seniority at par with the first batch of candidates who were given joining on 14.06.2013. Thus the order of Division Bench of this Court stands fully honoured.
11. So far as disparity in the salary among the two set of candidates are concerned, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the State of Telangana submits that the disparity that has arisen because of the fact that the employees/officers who were appointed and given joining on 14.06.2013 and the fact that they had come in the State Page 5 of 9 cadre earlier to the petitioners they were getting higher salary as compared to the petitioners whose date of joining was much subsequent.
12. Learned Government Pleader further submits that for the reason so far as the date of joining of the petitioners herein being of a subsequent period, the salary was bound to be lesser than the people who were appointed in the earlier period of time. Thus, the Government has ensured that the inter se seniority is provided strictly in accordance with the directions given by the Division Bench of this High Court in the aforesaid two writ petitions decided on 17.11.2022.
13. Given the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, all that we need to consider at this juncture is whether in the given factual circumstances, the petitioners in the present writ petition would be entitle for parity of pay at par with the candidates who have granted joining with effect from 14.06.2013 or not.
14. It would be relevant at this juncture to take note of the operative part of the order passed by the Division Bench in the aforesaid two writ petitions which stood disposed of on 17.11.2022:
23. Further, the assertion of the respondent authorities on scope of General Rule 33 shows their poor understanding of the Rules. General Rule 33 mandates determination of inter se seniority of direct recruits Page 6 of 9 based on merit secured in the recruitment examination and not based on date of joining. Further, proviso to General Rule 33 (b) requires assigning notional dates of commencement of probation to candidates joined later based on order of merit. Rule 36 (i) is more emphatic on this aspect. Thus, on a combined reading of General Rules 33 (b) and 36 (i), it is very clear that seniority of direct recruits has to be determined based on merit secured in the recruitment examination irrespective of date of joining and wherever necessary to assign notional dates of commencement of probation.
24. Before determining seniority of Post Graduate teachers the elementary requirement is to draw a combined merit list of candidates belonging to Telugu Medium and English Medium streams selected in pursuant to recruitment notification dated 06.02.2012.
This exercise is yet to be undertaken, even though long ago Hon'ble Supreme Court directed to determine common merit of all candidates irrespective of their medium of study. There cannot be a seniority list of direct recruits without a merit list.
25. One other aspect need to be noticed is that the selections were made before division of combined State of A.P. Therefore, the authorities ought to have drawn combined merit list of all candidates appointed in both States pursuant to 2012 selections. No such combined list is drawn so far. Alternatively, the employer in Telangana State ought to have drawn the names of candidates appointed in Telangana State by Page 7 of 9 interspersing Telugu Medium and English Medium candidates according to their merit and then proceed to determine inter se seniority of Post Graduate Teachers recruited in pursuant to 2012 recruitment.
26. Thus, the provisional seniority list impugned herein is vitiated on several counts, ex-facie illegal, contrary to statutory mandate, principles of law and directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court. It amounts to arbitrary exercise of power. It deserves to be set aside and is accordingly set aside. The respondent-employer is directed to draw combined merit list of direct recruits of 2012 by interspersing Telugu medium and English medium Post Graduate Teachers and then to determine inter se seniority of direct recruits based on the merit secured by them, without regard to date of joining and roster points for reservation.
27. The Writ Petitions are accordingly allowed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand dismissed.
15. The plain perusal and observing the directions given by the Division Bench in the aforesaid paragraphs makes it amply clear that the Division Bench of this High Court had struck down the provisional seniority list that was earlier prepared by the department and had directed the State Government to prepare a combine merit list and thereafter to provide seniority to each of the candidates in accordance with their respective merits position.
Page 8 of 9
16. Further, what is also reflected from the order of the Division Bench is that apart from directing the State Government for preparation of new combined merit list and seniority list, it was also directed that the seniority has to be prepared ignoring the date of joining of the candidates which in other words means that all the candidates would have to be granted seniority strictly in accordance with their merit position irrespective of the date of joining.
17. Thus, the candidates who were given joining on 14.06.2013 and the candidates who have given their joining on subsequent period all would have to be granted seniority with effect from 14.06.2013 and their seniority list inter se has to be prepared in accordance with their merit position in the list.
18. In the course of fixing the seniority for the petitioners as well from 14.06.2013 which has been accepted by the State of Telangana, we do not find any good reason as to why even thereafter any disparity of pay between the two set of candidates who have been granted appointment/seniority from the same date should remain. This in other words also lead to a situation where though the order of the Division Bench in the two writ petitions decided on 17.11.2022 would stand complied with but the beneficiary i.e., the candidates who had given joining on subsequent period would not be able to reap the fruits Page 9 of 9 from the said seniority list so prepared by the respondents. Their grievance in other way still remains though their writ petition earlier stood allowed.
19. In the given factual circumstances we are inclined to allow the writ petition so far as protecting the petitioners to the extent of granting pay parity with notional seniority to them at par with their counter parts who have been granted joining with effect from 14.06.2013 onwards. However, we make it clear that the benefits that shall be given to the petitioners herein would only be notional fixation from 14.06.2013 till 01.07.2025 and henceforth from 01.07.2025 onwards the petitioners would be entitle for the benefits of the salary at par with the candidates who were given appointment and joined with effect from 14.06.2013 onwards.
20. With the aforesaid directions, the instant writ petition stands allowed. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending if any, shall stand closed.
__________________ P.SAM KOSHY, J _________________________________ NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA, J Date: 25.06.2025 Pvt