Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The Director General Of Police vs T Krishnamachary on 15 February, 2022
Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra, Subba Reddy Satti
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI
WRIT APPEAL No.74 of 2021
(Through virtual mode)
The Director General,
A.P. Special Protection Force,
D.No.74-14-1A, 2nd Floor,
Rajanarendra Building,
Yanamalakuduru Road, Krishna Nagar,
Patamata, Vijayawada-520 007 and another.
..Appellants
Versus
T. Krishnamachary, S/o T. Narayanachary,
Aged: 54 years, Inspector,
A.P. Special Protection Force,
Government Printing Press,
Muthyalampadu, Vijayawada Guards,
Vijayawada-520011, Krishna District, A.P.
...Respondent
Counsel for the appellants : GP for Services I
Counsel for the respondent : Mr. P.V. Krishnaiah
ORAL JUDGMENT
Dt:15.02.2022
(per Prashant Kumar Mishra, CJ)
This writ appeal has been preferred challenging the order dated
10.12.2020 passed by learned single Judge in W.P.No.6921 of 2020.
2. The issue raised in this appeal is whether the respondent/writ
petitioner was accorded proper seniority in the post of Sub-Inspector to
which he was promoted in the year 2004.
3. Perusal of the material available on record goes to show that the
respondent/writ petitioner was denied seniority in the cadre of Sub-
Inspector from the date of his actual promotion to the said post i.e., from
HCJ & SRS, J
20.04.2004, on the ground that he was awarded minor punishment of
stoppage of one increment without cumulative effect vide order dated
06.10.2001 and as per G.O.Ms.No.289, dated 25.09.1999, which stipulates
that "one should not have any type of minor punishment during the last
three years as on the date of appointment by promotion or by transfer",
he was not eligible for promotion till 06.10.2004 and he was erroneously
promoted on 20.04.2004 by ignoring the punishment awarded to him and
having noticed the same, the date of his promotion was corrected as
26.11.2004 and therefore, his seniority was not reckoned from
20.04.2004.
4. It is to be noted that in the present case, G.O.Ms.No.289 Home
(Police-H) Department, dated 25.09.1999 and G.O.Ms.No.135 Home
(Legal-II) Department, dated 14.06.2013 would govern the subject issue.
By G.O.Ms.No.289, dated 25.09.1999, Andhra Pradesh Special Protection
Force Subordinate Service Rules, 1995 were amended by incorporating
'Note (d)' under the heading '2-Tests' in Annexure-IV, which provides that
one should not have any type of minor punishment for the last three years
and major punishments for last five years as specified in the Andhra
Pradesh Special Protection Force Act, 1991 (Act 25 of 1991) as on the
date of appointment by promotion or by transfer; and any person
awarded punishments within this period shall not be eligible for
appointment by promotion at his turn or by transfer. By subsequent
G.O.Ms.No.135, dated 14.06.2013, the above Note (d) under the heading
'2-Tests' in Annexure IV was deleted.
5. On earlier occasion, the petitioner had approached this Court by
filing W.P.No.40163 of 2018 for issuance of a direction to the respondents
therein to determine his seniority and promotion in the cadre of Sub-
HCJ & SRS, J
Inspector as per the amended rule issued in G.O.Ms.No.135, dated
14.06.2013. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated
08.08.2019 directing the respondents therein to dispose of the petitioner's
representation dated 26.06.2013 and pass appropriate orders strictly in
accordance with law taking into account G.O.Ms.No.135 Home (Legal-II)
Department, dated 14.06.2013.
6. According to the respondent/writ petitioner, in view of the
observation made by this Court in W.P.No.40163 of 2018, G.O.Ms.No.135,
dated 14.06.2013 has to be applied in his case and due seniority would be
accorded to him without taking into consideration Note (d) under the
heading '2-Tests' in Annexure IV cited in G.O.Ms.No.289, dated
25.09.1999, whereas according to the learned Government Pleader
appearing for the appellants, the said G.O.Ms.No.135 dated 14.06.2013
has prospective application, and the petitioner's seniority has already been
decided in the year 2004 and therefore, he is not entitled to be accorded
seniority as he sought for.
7. Having considered the submissions of both the counsel, we are in
full agreement with the order passed by the learned single Judge. We
observe that in the earlier writ petition viz., W.P.No.40163 of 2018, there
was a direction to the appellants to consider the petitioner's
representation strictly in accordance with law taking into account
G.O.Ms.No.135. The said direction indicates that G.O.Ms.No.135 has to be
made applicable in favour of the petitioner. The order in the said writ
petition has attained finality as no appeal was preferred against the same.
Therefore, it remains binding on both the parties. Now, it is not open for
the appellants to contend that G.O.Ms.No.135, dated 14.06.2013 has no
application in the case of the petitioner and it is not open for us to
HCJ & SRS, J
consider as to whether G.O.Ms.No.135 has prospective or retrospective
application qua the petitioner. However, it is made clear, the issue as to
whether G.O.Ms.No.135 has prospective or retrospective application is left
open to be considered at appropriate stage in appropriate proceedings.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. All pending
miscellaneous applications shall stand dismissed.
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, CJ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J
Nn
