E.Sriramulu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 9565 AP

       HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITION (AT) Nos.174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179,
  263, 313, 74, 268, 271, 278, 279 and 587 of 2021


COMMON ORDER :

     As the issue involved in these writ petitions is one

and the same, these matters are taken up together for

disposal by this Common Order.


     2. The facts in these writ petitions are similar and

identical, therefore W.P.(AT) No.174 of 2021 is taken as

lead case, and the facts therein are referred to for

convenience.

     3. The grievance of the petitioners in all these cases is

that the Government formulated a scheme providing a

provision of Employment to the displaced persons or their

dependants vide G.O.Ms.No.98 I & CAD, dated 15.04.1986

and framed certain guidelines directing the concerned

appointment authorities to fill up 50% vacancies of the

categories of equivalent to Junior Assistant/Typists and the

cadre below arising in Major & Medium Irrigation and Power

Projects by the displaced families/or their dependants i.e.,

displaced persons or his/her son, daughter or spouse in the
                                 2




family, of the respective project duly following the rule of

reservation   for   various   categories   viz.,   SC/ST/BC/Ex.

Serviceman/Physically         Handicapped          &    meritorious

Sportsman etc.      In view of the above, the applications for

appointment from the eligible candidates shall be made to

the District Collector concerned within a period of one year

from the date of actual displacement of the family,

preference shall be given with reference to the date of

displacement and to those applicants whose houses and

land are acquired against those whose land or house only is

acquired. Thereafter, the concerned District Collector shall

forward the same to the Project authorities for appointment.

Accordingly, the petitioners have made representations/

applications and some of the families were benefited.

Therefore, some of the displaced families and dependants

have made applications to the authorities to provide

employment as was done in the case of others.             However,

the respondents have not taken any action.             Aggrieved by

the same, the writ petitions have been filed.

4. The counter affidavits are filed in all three

matters, for convenience, the averments in counter in

W.P.(AT) No.174 of 2021 are stated as under:

The counter affidavit is filed by the respondents

denying all the averments made in the petitions and

contended that the date of displacement of the families in

the Projects. As per para 4(iii) of G.O.Ms.No.98, dated

15.04.1986 the applications for appointment from the

eligible candidates shall be made to the District Collector

concerned. However, the petitioners have not made any

applications to the District Collector concerned for

appointment under displaced persons quota till date. It is

further stated that in view of number of court cases filed by

the displaced persons the Government has issued

G.O.Ms.No.45, dated 04.07.2012 and also approved the

integrated seniority list of 962, duly suspending all the

seniority lists of 766 and 247 candidates, prepared under

G.O.Ms.No.44, dated 31.03.1999 and G.O.Ms.No.247 dated

29.12.2008 respectively. The name of the petitioner is not

covered in any of the seniority list.

It is further stated that in a similar case, the Tribunal

in its judgment dated 05.02.2015 dismissed the O.A

No.2409 of 2012 filed by Sri M. Satyanarayana S/o

Sundaraiah, displaced person under Srisailam Project

stating that "the petitioner in the present case has applied

for the job on 18.08.2007 i.e., after a gap of about 28 years

and he is not eligible for consideration as per G.O.ms.No.98

read with clarifications given vide Memo No.37498/L.A.IV-

R.R-II/2010-I, dated 14.05.2010. In view of the above, the

petitioner name was not included in the integrated seniority

list displaced persons quota, as per para 4(iii) of

G.O.Ms.No.98, dated 15.04.1986 read with clarifications

given in Memo No.37498/L.A.IV-R.R-II/2010-I, dated

14.05.2010. it is also stated that the petitioner has not

submitted any job application to the District Collector

concerned till to date and hence he is not eligible for any

post under displaced persons quota. There is nothing illegal

on the part of the respondents in not considering the case of

the petitioners. Hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petitions.

5. The pleadings which are cited by the petitioner in

W.P.(AT). No.174 of 2021, the same are adopted by the

other petitioners in other writ petitions i.e., W.P.(AT)

Nos.175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 263, 313, 74, 268, 271,

278, 279 and 587 of 2021 and the counters filed by the

respondents in all these writ petitions are also one and

same.

6. Heard Mr. Ram Gopal Rao, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners; and learned Government

Pleader for Services-III appearing for the respondents.

7. During hearing, both the learned counsel for the

petitioners reiterated the averments made in the petitions,

whereas learned Government Pleader for the respondents

also reiterated the contents made in the counter

affidavits.

8. It is pertinent to mention here that, admittedly,

the lands of the petitioners were acquired by the

Government for certain purposes and the petitioners along

with their families were displaced from the villages

respectively. The Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.98

dated 15.04.1986 extending the benefit of providing jobs to

the displaced persons. Subsequent thereto, a memo was

issued by the Government on 24.08.1987 relaxing the

condition of applying for appointment within one year from

the date of actual time, to the persons who were displaced

prior to the issuance of the said G.O. The Government itself

has framed a policy of providing jobs to the displaced

persons and also relaxed the condition of applying for

appointment within one year to the persons displaced prior

to the issuance of G.O.

9. During hearing, this Court observed that one of the

similarly situated person was approached the Hon'ble

Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad by way of filing

O.A.No.7917 of 2003 for considering his case for

appointment in the vacancies that are arising under

Srisailam Project circuits in both SRBC and SLBC and any

suitable post forthwith. The Tribunal, vide order, dated

16.07.2007, has allowed the application and directed the

respondents to consider the case of the petitioner therein for

appointment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98 irrespective of date of

application or irrespective of the limitation prescribed

therein and pass necessary orders within a period of eight

weeks. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents i.e.,

Secretary Irrigation and Command Area Development

Department has preferred writ petition before a single Bench

of this Court vide W.P.No.2436 of 2011 and the same was

dismissed vide order, dated 08.02.2011, confirming the

tribunal order.

10. This Court further observed that, similarly

situated persons were preferred O.A.No.10637 of 2009

before the Tribunal and the same was allowed vide order

dated 30.06.2010 directed the respondents to consider the

case of the petitioners therein in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98.

Being not satisfied with the same, the Government has

preferred writ petition before a Division Bench of this Court

vide W.P.No.2436 of 2011 and the same was also dismissed

confirming the Tribunal order. Challenging the same, the

Government has preferred SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme

Court vide Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.14305 of 2011

and the same was also dismissed vide order dated

04.07.2011, wherein it was stated that "we are not inclined

to interfere in this matter in exercise of the Court's jurisdiction

under Article 136 of the Constitution."

11. Again the Government has preferred writ petitions

before a Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of

Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad with regard to

the same subject, and the same were dismissed vide

common order dated 22.08.2012, wherein it was observed

as under:

"when the lands are acquired, be it for reservoir, canal or any ancillary purpose, we are of the opinion that the displaced persons are entitled to be considered in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98 Irrigation (PW) Department, dated 15.04.1986. Therefore, we do not see any merit in the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners herein. Consequently, we do not see any reason to interfere with the orders passed by the Tribunal. Hence, the writ petitions fail and are accordingly dismissed."

12. This Court further observed in Writ Petition

Nos.686 and 3711 of 2017, wherein the first writ petition

was filed by an individual i.e., P. Srinivas, S/o Devaiah,

seeking implementation of the judgment of A.P.

Administrative Tribunal and the second writ petition was

filed by the State of Telangana challenging the order of the

Tribunal and the same were disposed of vide common order

dated 04.12.2017 with some modifications. The operative

portion of the order, as under:

"therefore, both the writ petitions are disposed of modifying the order of the Tribunal to the following effect:

The procedure prescribed by G.O.Ms.No.98 dated 15.04.1986, shall be applied uniformly, both in respect of the applicant and in respect of the other candidates who now remain out of employment and they shall be provided employment in the order of preference indicated in the government Order G.O.Ms.No.98. the government shall take action as per the seniority so fixed as per G.O.Ms.No.98"

13. On perusing the above, it appears that the

individual therein has approached the Tribunal with a

grievance that he was not provided employment under the

scheme floated for the benefit of persons whose lands

and/or houses were submerged when huge irrigation

projects were undertaken. Reliance was placed by the

applicant before the Tribunal on G.O.Ms.No.98 dated

15.4.1986 and the tribunal has issued a direction to the

Government to appoint the applicant as Junior Assistant or

in any other equal post in the existing vacancies by giving

preference in terms of para-4(iii) of G.O.ms.No.98 dated

15.04.1986. Though the Government has not aggrieved by

the substantial portion of the direction so issued, they have

come up with second writ petition on the ground that the

individual can be given appointment only as per the

seniority in the list maintained by the department.

14. In other words, the only grievance of the

Government is that they cannot provide out of turn

employment to the original applicant. It also observed that

the applicant therein seeking is only a preferential treatment

in terms of para-4(iii) of G.O.Ms.No.98. But the problem is

that whether persons whose names are shown above the

name of the original applicant, lost only land or house and

whether their stand in comparison to the original applicant

at a disadvantage or not. Unless it is established that any

one or more persons who lost either land or house has been

included in the list of 397 persons over and above the

original applicant, it is not possible to give a direction as has

been given by the tribunal.

15. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and

on considering the submissions of both the counsels, this

Court is of the considered view that, directing the

respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners, the

procedure prescribed by G.O.Ms.No.98 dated 15.04.1986

shall be applied uniformly both in respect of the petitioners

and in respect of the other candidates who now remain out

of employment and they shall be provided employment in

the order of preference indicated in the Government order

G.O.Ms.No.98. Further, it is directed that the Government

shall take action as per the seniority so fixed as per

G.O.Ms.No.98, dated 15.04.1986.

16. With the above direction, all the Writ Petitions are

disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous

applications shall stand closed.

______________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J.

Date : 13 -12-2022 Gvl

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

WRIT PETITION (AT) Nos.174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 263, 313, 74, 268, 271, 278, 279 and 587 of 2021

Date : .12.2022

Gvl