K. Srinivasulu, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh.,
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. BALAYOGI WRIT PETITION Nos. 10435 and 10441 of 2017 COMMON ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar) The petitioners are the applicants in O.A.Nos.4229 and 4232 of 2016 respectively on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. Their grievance before the Tribunal was that the State of Andhra Pradesh, while fixing the formula of weightage for the purpose of promotions of Armed Reserve Police Constables appointed by transfer from Special Police Battalions, by way of G.O.Ms.No.1 dated 07.01.2016, failed to extend the same formula of weightage to Police Constables (Civil) appointed by transfer from Armed Reserve. They therefore sought a direction to the authorities to extend the same formula of weightage to Police Constables (Civil) appointed by transfer from Armed Reserve by considering their representations. By common order dated 23.11.2016, the Tribunal dismissed both O.As. being of the opinion that it was not the proper authority in a matter relating to proposed amendment of the rules.
Heard Sri K. Muralidhrar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners in both cases, and the learned Government Pleader for Services (Andhra Pradesh) for the authorities. It is an admitted fact that the representation dated 31.10.2016 made by the petitioners to the Principal Secretary to the Government, Home Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, in relation to their grievance is still pending consideration.
It appears that the Director General of Police, State of Andhra Pradesh, submitted report dated 22.02.2014 to the Principal Secretary to the Government, Home Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, pursuant to the common order passed by this Court in Md. Saiduddin v. K. Venkatesam1. By way of the said report, the Director General of Police proposed a separate formula for fixation of seniority for Police Constables (Armed Reserve) appointed by transfer from Police Constables (Andhra Pradesh Special Police). This proposal was accepted and given effect to vide G.O.Ms.No.1 dated 07.01.2016.
However, the proposal made by the Director General of Police with regard to the formula to be adopted for Police Constables (Civil) appointed by transfer from Police Constables (Armed Reserve) under Clause 7 (b) of his report was not taken into account by the State or given effect to. This is the cause for grievance insofar as the petitioners are concerned. As the petitioners have already submitted representation dated 31.10.2016 in this regard to the authorities concerned and it is for them to consider the same in accordance with law and take appropriate action as deemed fit, the understanding of the Tribunal that it could not play any role in a matter relating to the proposed amendment of the rules is not correct. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of setting aside the common order dated 23.11.
2016 passed by the Tribunal, insofar as it pertains to O.A.Nos.4229 and 4232 of 2016, and directing the first respondent to consider the representation dated 31.10.2016 made by the petitioners in the context of the report 1 W.P.No.21610 of 2011 and batch dated 08.10.
dated 22.02.2014 of the Director General of Police and the order of this Court referred to supra. This exercise shall be completed expeditiously and, in any event, not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs. ______________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 23.03.2017 ______________________ N. BALAYOGI, J va