E. Anjaneyulu And 6 Others vs State Of Telangana And 3 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2262 Tel

      THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI

                WRIT PETITION NO.17720 OF 2022

                                   AND

                WRIT PETITION NO.25105 OF 2022

                          COMMON ORDER


      In both these Writ Petitions, the petitioners are seeking a Writ of

Mandamus declaring G.O.Rt.No.112, Irrigation and Command Area

Development (Ser.I) Department, dt.26.03.2022, as illegal, arbitrary and

violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and as

contrary to the State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 and the

Telangana Irrigation Engineering Service Rules, 2018 and consequently

to set aside the same.


2.     In addition to the above, in W.P.No.25105 of 2022, the

petitioners are also seeking a declaration that the writ petitioners therein

are entitled for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineers in

preference to the Assistant Engineers specified in Circular Memo

No.Rc/ENC/F4/ACR/15071025/2022 dt.11.04.2022 of the Engineer-in-

Chief (Admn.), I & CAD Department, Hyderabad and also a declaration
                                                    W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022
                                     2



that the petitioners are entitled for promotion to the post of Deputy

Executive Engineer in the existing vacancies strictly in terms of the final

integrated seniority list dt.06.03.2020 in terms of the Telangana

Irrigation Engineering Service Rules, 2018 notified vide G.O.Ms.No.32,

Irrigation & CAD (Services.I) Department, dt.25.04.2018 and to pass

such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the

interest of justice.


3.      Vide order dt.06.09.2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in W.P.No.17720

of 2022, respondents 3 and 4 have been impleaded in W.P.No.17720 of

2022 and vide order dt.06.09.2022 in I.A.No.2 of 2022 in W.P.No.25105

of 2022, respondents 5 to 10 have been impleaded in W.P.No.25105 of

2022.

4. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petitions are

that writ petitioners herein are the direct recruits to the post of Assistant

Executive Engineer, who joined in the months of November and

December, 2008 pursuant to the notification issued by the State Public

Service Commission. Respondents 3 and 4 in W.P.No.17720 of 2022

and respondents 5 to 10 in W.P.No.25105 of 2022 are the diploma

engineers who were initially appointed as Technical Assistants and W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

subsequently have been promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer.

Both the petitioners as well as the unofficial respondents are working

under the Irrigation Department of the Government of Telangana. The

Government of Andhra Pradesh, as it then was, under the powers

conferred by the Proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India,

framed regulations known as "Andhra Pradesh Engineering Service

Rules" published vide G.O.Ms.No.285, Public Works Department,

dt.22.02.1967. Under the said G.O., the post of Assistant Executive

Engineer was to be filled

(i) by direct recruitment;

(ii) recruitment by transfer of Supervisors of Andhra Pradesh

Engineering Subordinate Service, who have acquired B.E.

or AIME qualification and who are approved probationers

in that category.

Subsequently, the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.32, Irrigation

and CAD (Services-IX) Department, dt.12.04.2010 notifying the Rules

called as "Andhra Pradesh Irrigation Engineering Service Rules, 2010"

in supersession of the Rules framed under G.O.Ms.No.285 W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

dt.22.02.1967. Under the said G.O., the Assistant Executive Engineer

falls under Category-6 and the method of appointment to the said post is

(i) by direct recruitment;

(ii) by appointment by transfer of Assistant Engineer and

Assistant Technical Officer/Junior Technical Officer; and

(iii) by appointment by direct recruitment of in-service Work

Inspectors of all Grades.

The Assistant Executive Engineers (direct recruits), Assistant Engineers,

Technical Officers Special Grade were all eligible for further promotion

to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer. In a unit of 24 vacancies, the

vacancies at 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21 and 22 were

earmarked for Assistant Executive Engineers while the vacancies at 4, 8,

12, 16 and 24 were earmarked for Assistant Engineers and the 20th

vacancy was earmarked for Technical Officer Selection Grade and the

11th and 23rd vacancies were earmarked for Engineering Post Graduates

in the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineers. As such, in a unit of 24

vacancies, Assistant Engineers were eligible for 5 vacancies.

W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

5. After formation of the State of Telangana, the Irrigation

Engineering Service Rules have been amended further by issuance of

G.O.Ms.No.32, Irrigation and CAD (Services. I) Department,

dt.25.04.2018 known as "Telangana Irrigation Engineering Service

Rules, 2018" in supersession of the Special and Ad hoc Rules issued in

G.O.Ms.No.32 dt.12.04.2010. Rule 2 of the said Rules specifies the

category of posts and the Assistant Executive Engineer falls in

Category-6. Rule 3 thereof specified the method of recruitment to the

post of Assistant Executive Engineer

(i) by direct recruitment by selection made on the basis of

the exam conducted by Telangana State Public Service

Commission;

(ii) appointment by transfer of Assistant Engineers, who

fulfil the criteria and completed 6 years of qualifying

service in the cadre of Assistant Engineer subject to

being approved probationers in the cadre of Assistant

Engineer.

The qualification for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer by direct

recruitment and by appointment by transfer is Bachelor's Degree in W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

specified engineering services. The Assistant Executive Engineers under

Category-6 are eligible for further promotion to the post of Deputy

Executive Engineer, i.e., Category-5 after completion of 5 years of

regular service in the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer, out of

which, 2 years should be field service. The unit of appointment of

Assistant Executive Engineer and Deputy Executive Engineer is Unit-1

comprising Zone-V and Unit-2 comprising Zone-VI.

6. The State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.31, Irrigation and

CAD (Services. I) Department, dt.25.04.2018, notifying the Rules

known as "Telangana Irrigation Engineering Subordinate Service Rules,

2018" and Category-1 of the said category is Assistant

Engineer/Technical Officer. Vide G.O.Ms.No.84 I&CAD (Ser.I.1)

Department, dt.14.06.2011, the post of Assistant Engineer is a Gazetted

post and the Assistant Engineer is first level Gazetted post and the post

of Assistant Executive Engineer is second level Gazetted post and the

post of Deputy Executive Engineer is third level Gazetted post.

Thereafter, G.O.Ms.No.52, Irrigation and CAD Department

dt.30.11.2019 was issued notifying the Deputy Executive Engineer as a

State cadre post. Subsequently, the State Government issued W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

G.O.Ms.No.1, dt.25.01.2020 amending Rule 5 of the Rules notified in

G.O.Ms.No.32 dt.25.04.2018, according to which, the minimum

qualification for appointment by transfer to the post of Assistant

Executive Engineer is Diploma in the specified discipline and thus, on

and from 25.01.2020, the Assistant Engineers with diploma qualification

were also eligible for appointment by transfer to the post of Assistant

Executive Engineers. Accordingly, the Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation and

CAD Department, has issued proceedings dt.27.01.2020 converting 35

Assistant Engineers (11 from Zone-V and 24 from Zone-VI) to Assistant

Executive Engineers from the date of completion of 6 years of service in

the cadre of Assistant Engineers and thus, the said Assistant Engineers

became Assistant Executive Engineers in the years 2004 to 2008 in

respective dates specified in the proceedings dt.27.01.2020 and they

were also placed in the final integrated seniority list of Assistant

Executive Engineers in Zones-V and VI up to 2008 Public Service

Commission (in short, 'PSC') batch. This has resulted in the Assistant

Engineers who were appointed by transfer as Assistant Executive

Engineers vide proceedings dt.27.01.2020, march over the direct recruit

Assistant Executive Engineers of 2008 PSC batch in view of their W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

conversion from retrospective date of completion of 6 years of service in

the cadre of Assistant Engineers. The said Assistant Engineers were also

further promoted to the post of Deputy Executive Engineers and thus,

the direct recruit Assistant Executive Engineers were denied

promotional opportunities. In the meantime, the Irrigation Diploma

Engineers Associations have made a representation dt.07.01.2021 that

the senior most Assistant Engineers who have completed more than 50

years of age are being denied promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.32

dt.25.04.2018, whereas the 2008 batch of Assistant Executive Engineers

are being provided promotional opportunities with only 12 years of

service and thereby the Assistant Engineers are deprived of their

fundamental rights. Therefore, they sought promotions for 2002-2010

batches of Assistant Engineers as a one time measure as they are seniors

to the Assistant Executive Engineers of 2008 batch. The State

Government has called for a report from the Engineer-in-Chief (Admn.),

Hyderabad for taking necessary action thereon. The Engineer-in-Chief

(Admn.), Hyderabad, vide letter No.RC/ENC/A1/2021 dt.26.11.2021,

gave a detailed report stating that the request of the Irrigation Engineers

Association for one time promotion of Assistant Engineers to the post of W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

Deputy Executive Engineer (DEE) for 2002 to 2010 is not feasible for

consideration as per the existing service rules as it will be against the

service rules and would lead to legal complications and further that their

request will be considered after 2008 PSC batch AEEs as they were

promoted as AEE by appointment by transfer after 2008 PSC batch

AEEs as per their eligibility. Thereafter, the Government has issued

G.O.Rt.No.112, Irrigation and Command Area Development (Ser.I)

Department, dt.26.03.2022 ordering that the senior Assistant Engineers

who have completed a minimum service of 11 years in the category of

Assistant Engineers, as on 31.12.2021, shall be considered for

promotion to the category of Deputy Executive Engineers in exemption

of Rules 3 and 7(v) of the Telangana Irrigation Engineering Service

Rules, 2018 as a one time measure and by placing their cases before the

DPC subject to certain conditions. Challenging the proceedings issued

in G.O.Rt.No.112 dt.26.03.2022 to be in contravention of the State and

Subordinate Service Rules, the present Writ Petitions have been filed.

7. Sri G. Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Counsel representing Smt.

K.Uday Sri, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that

prior to issuance of G.O.Ms.No.32 dt.25.04.2018 for the post of Deputy W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

Executive Engineer, there were two feeder categories, i.e., Assistant

Engineers and Assistant Executive Engineers. The Assistant Executive

Engineers were appointed by direct recruitment, while the Assistant

Engineers were appointed by transfer by promotion. It is submitted that

under G.O.Ms.No.32 dt.25.04.2018, Assistant Engineers were the feeder

category for the post of Assistant Executive Engineers, who were in

turn, feeder category for the Deputy Executive Engineers. However,

vide G.O.Ms.No.32 dt.25.04.2018, only Assistant Executive Engineers

were made eligible for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive

Engineers and Assistant Engineers were made eligible for promotion to

the post of Assistant Executive Engineer subject to their fulfilling

certain conditions. It was also made clear in Note-3 of Rule 3 of the said

G.O. that where direct recruitment of Assistant Executive Engineers is

made in a particular year, the eligible Assistant Engineers who are

appointed by transfer as Assistant Executive Engineers after completion

of 6 years of service shall be placed below/above the direct recruit

candidates of that particular year based on the date of communication of

PSC selection list to Engineer-in-Chief (Admn.) and if the selection list

by Public Service Commission is communicated to Engineer-in-Chief W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

(Admn.) on a particular date, all the Assistant Engineers appointed by

transfer as Assistant Executive Engineers before that date will be placed

above the direct recruit Assistant Executive Engineers and vice versa.

Thus, he submitted that seniority of the Assistant Engineers who were

promoted as Assistant Executive Engineers prior to the date of

appointment of direct recruits was protected. He also drew the attention

of this Court to Rule 7 which prescribes minimum service and eligibility

for promotion and particularly Sub-rule (v) thereunder which provides

that for promotion to the cadre of Deputy Executive Engineer from

Assistant Executive Engineers, one should have rendered five years of

regular service in the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer, out of

which, two years should be field service. It is submitted that aggrieved

by the amendments made to the service rules under G.O.Ms.No.32

dt.25.04.2018, Writ Petitions in W.P.No.32632 of 2018 and batch were

filed before this Court and the same are pending adjudication. It is

submitted that no interim orders were passed by this Court except

observing that if any promotions are made after the Service Rules of

2018, then such promotions shall be subject to the final outcome of the

Writ Petitions. It is submitted that in the said Writ Petitions, the W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

Government has filed a counter affidavit justifying the amendments to

the rule position. It is submitted that contrary to the said stand of the

Government, the Government has now issued G.O.Rt.No.112

dt.26.03.2022 granting promotion to the senior Assistant Engineers who

have completed a minimum service of 11 years in the category of

Assistant Engineer as on 31.12.2021 as Deputy Executive Engineers in

exemption of the Rules 3 and 7(v) of the TIES Rules, 2018 as a one time

measure. It is submitted that before making the amendments to the Rules

of 2018, there was a meeting conducted with all the Associations i.e.,

Telangana Assistant Executive Engineers Association, Diploma

Engineers Association and Technical Officers Association in the

chambers of the Engineer-in-Chief (Admin.) and after taking their views

and suggestions only, draft rules were submitted to the Government as

stated by the respondents in their counter affidavit in W.P.No.32632 of

2018. He submitted that though the report of the Engineer-in-Chief was

called for, the same has not been taken into consideration at all while

passing G.O.Rt.No.112 dt.26.03.2022 except for making a reference to

the same. He submitted that though it is not in dispute that the

Government has power to relax the rules in favour of any person, it has W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

to be only in public interest and the Government has not given any

reasons for taking the stand contrary to the report of the Engineer-in-

Chief. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has drawn the

attention of this Court to the details of the petitioners who have put in 13

years of service but not yet promoted as DEE as against the AEs who

are sought to be promoted after putting in only 11 years of service to

demonstrate as to how the petitioners are being denied promotion in

spite of their possessing higher qualification and having been direct

recruits. Therefore, according to him, G.O.Rt.No.112 dt.26.03.2022 has

no rationale or basis. He has also drawn the attention of this Court to an

instance whereunder, Ch.Ravinder Reddy who was the President of the

Diploma Engineers Association and was promoted as Assistant

Executive Engineer on 27.01.2020 and was placed at Serial No.4.

Therefore, he submitted that the contention of the Diploma Engineers

Association that they were not getting promotions in spite of putting in

sufficient number of years of service is not correct. He submitted that

even the Hyderabad Engineers Association and the Association of

Telangana Assistant Executive Engineers have made representations to

the Government, but the same have not been taken into consideration by W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

the Government. As regards the argument of the implead respondents

that the Writ Petition is not maintainable for non-joinder of affected

parties, he submitted that the details of the affected parties were not

available on the date of filing of the Writ Petitions and therefore, they

could not be made parties. It is further submitted that no right of any of

the parties was infringed and therefore, the Writ Petition is maintainable.

He therefore sought for setting aside of G.O.Rt.No.112 dt.26.03.2022.

8. The unofficial respondents 3 and 4 in W.P.No.17720 of 2022

have filed a counter affidavit and Sri Chikkudu Prabhakar, learned

counsel appearing for them has reiterated the submissions made in the

counter affidavit.

9. Sri M.Surender Rao, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri

Srinivasa Rao Madiraju, learned counsel appearing for unofficial

respondents 4 to 10 in W.P.No.25105 of 2022 has submitted that power

of relaxation was exercised by the Government while issuing

G.O.Rt.No.112 dt.26.03.2022. It is submitted that Rules 31 and 32(a) of

the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 empower the

Government to relax the rules. It is submitted that where it appears to

the Government to be just and equitable, the Government may relax the W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

conditions and therefore, this Court under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India cannot go into the correctness or otherwise of the

decision of the Government as long as it is exercised in accordance with

extant rules. He submitted that vide Service Rules under G.O.Ms.No.32

dt.12.04.2010, the Assistant Engineers as well as the Assistant

Executive Engineers were both feeder category for the post of Deputy

Executive Engineer by promotion, whereas vide G.O.Ms.No.32

dt.25.04.2018, the channel of direct promotion to Deputy Executive

Engineer was taken away from the Assistant Engineers and therefore,

the unofficial respondents herein had filed a Writ Petition before this

Court and thereafter, have made representations to the Government for

relaxation of certain conditions. It is submitted that the Assistant

Engineers as well as the Assistant Executive Engineers discharge same

or similar functions and therefore, they have to be treated on par with

each other. He referred to Note 1 under Rule 3 of G.O.Ms.No.32

dt.25.04.2018 to demonstrate that Assistant Executive Engineers/

Assistant Engineers are treated as same cadre for the purpose of

determining the cadre strength of each of the categories of Telangana

Irrigation Engineering Services. He also referred to G.O.Ms.No.32 W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

dt.12.04.2010 and Note-3 under Rule 3 thereof, wehreunder in respect of

the combined cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer and Assistant

Engineer (Non-Gazetted), the ratio for promotion to the next higher

category should be 3:1 respectively. He also referred to Note-4

thereunder which provided for method of appointment for the post of

Assistant Executive Engineer/Assistant Engineer cadre in the ratio of

3:1. He therefore tried to bring a parity between the post of Assistant

Engineer vis-a-vis Assistant Executive Engineer in the Rules issued in

G.O.Ms.No.32 dt.12.04.2010 and the Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.32

dt.25.04.2018 and since the opportunity of promotion to the post of

Deputy Executive Engineer from the post of Assistant Engineer was

taken away by the amendment of the Rules in 2018, the affected parties

have made a representation to the Government and by exercising power

under Rule 31 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996,

the Government has thought it fit to relax the Rules as a one time

measure. It is submitted that since it is clear that the unofficial

respondents and other similarly placed persons were being affected by

the amendment of the Rules, the Government has taken a decision and

such administrative decision cannot be challenged before this Court in a W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He

submitted that the report of the Engineer-in-Chief was only to place

facts on record and the ultimate decision has to be taken by the

Government by arriving at an independent satisfaction on the facts and

circumstances of the case. It is submitted that the Assistant Engineers

have already challenged the amended Rules by way of a Writ Petition

before this Court. He therefore justified the issuance of G.O.Rt.No.112

dt.26.03.2022 and the relaxation thereunder in respect of the Assistant

Engineers who have completed 11 years of service.

10. Sri Chikkudu Prabhakar, learned counsel for impleaded

respondents 3 and 4 in W.P.No.17720 of 2022 also supported the

arguments of the learned Senior Counsel Sri M.Surender Rao and also

placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the

case of Amrik Singh Vs. Union of India 1.

11. Learned Government Pleader for Services-II relied upon the

averments made in the counter affidavit and submitted that the only

issue to be considered in these Writ Petitions is whether G.O.Rt.No.112

dt.26.03.2022 is reasonable and justified and whether the Government

1980 LF(SC) 15 W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

which has power to relax the rules has done so for just and equitable

grounds. He submitted that Rule 31 of A.P. State and Subordinate Rules,

1996 clearly empowers the State Government to relax the rules for

equitable and justifiable cause and since the Assistant Engineers were

being deprived of their eligibility for promotion directly to the post of

Deputy Executive Engineer on fulfilling of certain conditions, the

Government has thought it fit to relax Rules 3 and 7(v) of the Service

Rules as a one time measure and therefore, there was no arbitrariness in

issuing G.O.Rt.No.112 dt.26.03.2022. He further submitted that even

under G.O.Rt.No.112 dt.26.03.2022, the ratio of 3:1 is being maintained

between Assistant Executive Engineers and Assistant Engineers for

promotion to the category of Deputy Executive Engineers and therefore,

there is no injustice caused to the Assistant Executive Engineers by

granting of such relaxation to the Assistant Engineers.

12. Learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as the respondents

have placed reliance upon certain judgments which shall be dealt with

while dealing with the arguments of each of the learned counsel.

13. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on

record, this Court finds that the Government of Telangana has framed W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

the Engineering Service Rules as early as in 1967 and thereafter, the

same were amended in the year 2010 and after formation of the State of

Telangana in the year 2018, the post of Deputy Executive Engineer was

to be filled up from the Category-6, i.e., the post of Assistant Executive

Engineer. While the Service Rules of 1967 provided for filling up the

post of Assistant Executive Engineers by direct recruitment and also by

transfer of Supervisors of A.P. Engineering Subordinate Services who

have acquired B.E. or AIME qualification after completion of probation

in that category, the 2010 Rules provided for appointment of Assistant

Executive Engineers by direct recruitment and also by appointment by

transfer of Assistant Engineers and Assistant Technical Officers/Junior

Technical Officers and also by appointment by direct recruitment of in-

service Work Inspectors of all Grades. Five (5) vacancies in a unit of 24

vacancies were earmarked for Assistant Engineers, majority of

vacancies were earmarked for Direct Recruits of Assistant Executive

Engineers and few vacancies for Technical Officers Selection Grade and

for Engineering Post Graduates in the cadre of Assistant Executive

Engineers. However, in 2018 Rules, the Assistant Executive Engineers

were to be appointed by direct recruitment and by transfer of Assistant W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

Engineers who fulfilled the criteria and completed 6 years of qualifying

service in the cadre of Assistant Engineer and the Assistant Executive

Engineers were eligible for promotion as Deputy Executive Engineers

after rendering 5 years of regular service out of which 2 years should be

field service. Thus, by the amendment of Rules in 2018, the eligible

Assistant Engineers have lost the opportunity of being considered for

direct promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer. It was in

such circumstances that they have made a representation to the

Government. The Government had called for a report from the

Engineer-in-Chief and the report was also submitted stating that it is not

feasible to relax the conditions for Assistant Engineers. However, this

Court finds that the opinion of the Engineer-in-Chief can only be

recommendatory and cannot be held to be binding on the Government. It

is the Government which has to take a decision after taking into

consideration all the factual as well as legal aspects of the issue. It is

claimed that Rule 31 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules,

1996 empowers the Government to take a decision in the circumstances

which appear to the Government to be just and equitable. Rule 31 of the

A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 reads as under:

W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

"31. Relaxation of rules by the Governor:-- Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules or in the special rules, the Governor shall have the power to relax any rules contained in these rules or special rules, in favour of any person or class of persons, in relation to their application to any member of a service or to any person to be appointed to the service, class or category or a person or a class of persons, who have served in any civil capacity in the Government of Telangana in such manner as may appear to be just and equitable to him, where such relaxation is considered necessary in the public interest or where the application of such rule or rules is likely to cause undue hardship to the person or class of persons concerned."

Therefore, in view of the above rule position, where the Government

considers the case to be just and equitable, it has the power to relax the

rules. In this case, the Assistant Engineer was eligible to be promoted as

Assistant Executive Engineer if he has rendered 6 years of service and

also possesses a diploma in the respective field and thereafter, after

putting in another 5 years of service as an Assistant Executive Engineer,

he would be further eligible to be promoted as Deputy Executive

Engineer. The Government therefore has taken into consideration that

only such of the Assistant Engineers who have put in 11 years of service

as on the date of the memo are eligible to be promoted to the post of

Deputy Executive Engineer subject to fulfilling certain conditions.

Further, as seen from G.O.Rt.No.112 dt.26.03.2022, the ratio of 3:1 W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

between Assistant Executive Engineers and Assistant Engineers is also

directed to be maintained. Therefore, the Government seems to have

taken the interest of all the stake holders into consideration before taking

a decision, though there are no reasons given in writing as to why the

report of the Engineer-in-Chief was not accepted by it. Where the

Government deems it fit and proper to exercise its powers under Rule 31

of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996, it has to be done

in public interest and for just and equitable cause. Since the opinion of

the Engineer-in-Chief was only to ascertain the rule position and the

effects of such relaxation, it is within the powers of the Government to

take a decision thereafter in accordance with law. This Court does not

find that no allegation of mala fides is made by the petitioners in these

Writ Petitions. In view of the same, this Court does not find any reason

to interfere with G.O.Rt.No.112 dt.26.03.2022.

14. The learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the

decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhupendra Nath

Hazarika and another Vs. State of Assam and others 2 for the

proposition that where the Government is vested with power to dispense

(2013) 2 SCC 516 W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

with or to relax any rule, it cannot be exercised in an arbitrary manner so

as to dispense with the procedure of selection in entirety in respect of a

particular class, for it has to be strictly construed and there has to be

apposite foundation for exercise of such power. It is submitted that the

State as a model employer has to be fair and just in its approach and it

cannot exercise the power arbitrarily without due regard to Articles 14

and 16 of the Constitution of India. He further placed reliance upon the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vasu Dev Singh

and others Vs. Union of India and others 3 on the power of the

administrator in terms of the provision of Section 3 of the E.P.Urban

Rent Restriction Act, 1949 and the power of the Legislature to amend

the law. These decisions are on the legal point as to whether the

Government can exercise its power of relaxation of rules arbitrarily.

15. In the decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the

unofficial respondents in the case of Santosh Kumar Vs. State of

Andhra Pradesh and others 4, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has dealt

with the power of the Government to relax the rules and as to whether

notice to all the persons who are likely to be affected is required before

(2006) 12 SCC 753

Appeal (Civil) No.4917 of 2000 dt.22.05.2003 W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

exercising the power under Rule 47 of the General Rules

(Corresponding to new Rule 31 of 1996 Rules), it was held that the rule

ex facie does not contemplate any notice being given and it is not a case

of considering inter se claim of any particular individuals as it is a case

of relaxing the eligibility of a single individual as against many and

under such circumstances, the rule does not envisage notice to all the

affected persons. In the case of M.Venkateswarlu Vs. Government of

Andhra Pradesh 5, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was considering when a

notice to all persons who are likely to be affected is required before

exercising power under Rule 47 and it was held that the rule does not

contemplate any notice being given in such circumstances. The same is

the ratio in the case of J.C.Yadav and others Vs. State of Haryana

and others 6.

16. Thus, from all the above decisions, it is noticed that the

Government has got power to relax the rules provided it is done in just

and equitable manner. In the facts and circumstances stated above, this

Court finds that the relaxation of the rules was a one time measure for

just and equitable cause and therefore, there is no merit in these Writ

1996 LF(SC) 974

1990 AIR 857 (SC) W.P.Nos.17720 & 25105 of 2022

Petitions. However, it is made clear that this decision shall not have any

effect on the Writ Petitions filed by the Assistant Engineers in

W.P.No.32632 of 2018 and batch challenging the amendments made to

the service rules under G.O.Ms.No.32 dt.25.04.2018. This decision in

both these Writ Petitions is only in respect of G.O.Rt.No.112, Irrigation

and Command Area Development (Ser.I) Department, dt.26.03.2022.

17. Both these Writ Petitions are accordingly dismissed. No order as

to costs.

18. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in both these Writ

Petitions, including I.A.No.5 of 2022 in W.P.No.17720 of 2022, shall

stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI

Date: 12.09.2023 Svv