The High Court · 2025

Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to forth with consider the cases of the Petitioners No' 4 lo 7 for promotion to the post of Prohibition and Excise Head constable as per the seniority list prepared by the Respondent No 2 in proceedings ct.No.A2l7512013 dated 1B-11-2019 in the existing vacancies pending disposal of the Writ Petition IA NO :2 OF 2020 PetitionUnderSectlonl5lCPCprayingthatinthecirCUmstancesstated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of the proceedings vide cr.No. 02/2018lcPElB2 dated 28- 01-2020 issued by the Respondent No.1 pending disposal of this writ Petition in the in the interest o1' justice. lA NO: 3 OF 2020 Between: 1 The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise' State of Telangana' Abkari ' BU";;, N;;PallY Road HYderabad 2. The District Prohibition and Excise Officer' Nizamabad' Nizamabad District' 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise' Nizamabad' Nizamabad ana. Rep. by its Principal Secretary' Prohibition and l"[trtlii eriiaings. HYderabad

4. The State of Telan Excise DePartment, District. s S ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS AND 1 2

4. E t) 7 L Johnson S/o.Amrutha Rao, Age 53 Yrs Occ' Head Constable' R/o Flat No' iaIV"'i'.ji.lii Apartments Vinav'akanagar' N.zamabad B Hanumanthu S/o Late Narayana, Age 52 yrs'-occ Head Constable, R/o. H.No 1-12-130 l1Al4o3. p"l'n?nli r-ioml"s' Srinagar Colonv' Vinayakanagar' Nizamabad G Yellaiah S/o. Balaiah. Age 51 yrs' Occ Head Constable Rlo. H No' 2-4712' Patha Rajampet Village, Kamareddy ulst' T. Venkata Swamy S/o Rajql?!'Age 51yrs' Occ: Constable' R/o H No 1-53' XannJpur Post' KimareddY Dist' D Saibaba S/o. Ganga Goud' Age 50 yrs' Occ' Constable' Rto' 1-2-409110' RakshPet, Bodhan Post. Y. Laxman S/o. Hanumanthu' Age 50 yrs' Occ: Constable Jadijamalpur Post' : c o n sta b I e' H N o 2 -B 7' [ri*r:U gr il s:- sil"1il1Ta ]: i,,::.['d ,?cc Bodhan. ...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS €tonstabre' o/o rhe Assistant Commlssloner 5trii""n, borjkondalKamareddy District 8 K Ravi F:j !19;-lligi.E?,:,Arf"il ili!;,3fii"Irt 9. B Jeevan S/o. Gangadha' {S,u 19.yrs Occ: P and E Constable P and E - 10,G, Amruth Reddy S/o' Iirupathi Reddy, Age 46 yrs' Occ: P and E Constable. ' " F ;;; "E'sirilon,'aicntonod' Kamareddv District ll.B.MadhusudhanS/o'B.SayaReddy.Age45yrs'occ:PandEConstable' '' Srir6iilp,i':c[ect<post, Kamareddy District (Respondent No.b to Respondent No'11 are not necessary parties in this Petition) "'RES'.NDENTS/RESP.NDENTS Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition' the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 19.02.2020 passed in w P No 2823 of 2020 ' Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI P' VENKATA SUBBARAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION AND EXCISE GP FOR SERVICES-III Counsel for the Respondent Nos's to 8: SRI VADAPALLI RAMESH The Court made the following: ORDER I HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 2823 OF 2O2O ORDER: Heard Sri P. Venkata Subba Rao, counsel .learned for petitioners as well as learned Government Pleader for Prohibition & Excise and Sri Vadapaili Ramesh, learncd counsel for Respondents 5 to 8.

2. This Writ Petition is fi1ed by petitioners to set aside the proceedings of Respondent No.1 vide Cr'No' O2l2OlSlCPElB2 , dated: 28-O|-2O2O and consequently to direct Respondents to forthwith consider the cases of petitioners No. 4 to 7 for promotion to the post of Prohibition and Excise Head Constable as per the seniority list prepared by the 2"4 Respondent by Proceedings in Cr.No.A2 l75l2Ol3 Dated 18-11- 20 I 9 in the existing vacancies.

3. It is the case of Petitioners that they were initially appointed as A.P.S.P. Constables and later were deputed to work in Prohibition and Excise Departmenf and were subsequently absorbed as Prohibition and Excise Constables, basing on the G.O.Ms' No. 1103 Revenue (Exercise- 1) Department d.ated:|7 -O8-2OO7 . Petitioners submitted their willingness for absorption as Prohibition and Excise Constables 1 2 and after thr:ir deputation on the strength of the order of the commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, and after obtaining the options and the willingness from the Petitioners that they would abide by the seniorily list. Final seniority list was issued by the department after considering the objections vide proceedings being Cr. N<t. A2l75l2Ol3 dated: 18-11-2O19, by the District Prohibition and Excise officer Nizamabad District, the said list was issued after considering the objections. while matter stood thus, the l"r Respondent had issued Proceedings being Cr. No. 02l2018/CPElIri2 dated 28-O1-2O2O, directin g Respondent No.2 to furr-rish the list of constables absorbed from the APSP Pertaining ro the District and to complete the exercise of re- hxation of seniority in terms of merit list as per the orders of this Court in W.P.No. 26855 of 2O19 but whereas the order directed Respondent No. 1 to dispose it in accordance with the law but n<lt on Merit basis. 4 . It is also submitted that Respondent No 1 is not the appellate authority against the orders passed by Respondent No 2 as per the provisions of A.P State and Sub-ordinate Service Rules, in as much as the Higher authorit5r to Respondent No.2 is the Respondent No.3 and admittedly the Respondent No. I is ^rl -) the Head of the Department, in other words, Respondent No. 1 may be revisional authority but not appellate authority.

5. Respondent No 2 filed counter to Writ Petition stating that on the representations dated 24-1O-2O19 and - 2l-O3-20rc filed by others before the 1"t Respondent this Court passed orders in W.P No. 26855 of 2019 dated 04-12-2019 directing the lst respondent to consider the representations daLed 24-lO-2019 and dispose of the appeal dated 21-O3-2O18 submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. Accordingly, Respondent No. 1 issued instructions to Respondents to furnish detailed list of the absorbed APSP Constables of 1995 batch of Nizamabad District duly mentioning the Battalion number against their names, so as to forward the merit list of the respective battalions, available in the office of the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Telalgana State, Hyderabad for taking further action in the matter. In Cr.No.O2l2Ol8lCPElB2 dated 2a-Ol-2O2O the l "tRespondent communicated the copies of merit marks ol absorbed APSP Constables of 1995 batch received from the IG battalion and instructed to complete re-hxation o[ seniority in terms of the orders of this Court in W.P .No 31978 of 2078, W.P.No. 6701 of 2018, W.P.No 26855 of 2019 and any other I 1 a' W.P.s which may be fiIed in this matter pertaining to their district by issuing notices to all the individuals affected by the process, calltng lor objections if any. It is stated that as this process was under progress, Petitioners have, approached this Court requesting to issue directions to fix the seniorit5l as per the age. Respondent No. 1 submitted that as per the

6. seniority list alrcady prepared in Rc.No. A2/7512012, dated' 26-02-2014 and on administrative grounds, Petitioners at Sl. No. 1, 2 & 3 u'ere promoted as Prohibition arrd Excise Head Constables purely on temporary basis, subject to conditions and petitioners have submitted the Unequivocal Undertaking. It is further cast o[ Respondent No.2 that as per Government Orders in G.O Ms. No. 1 l03 Revenue (Excise- 1) Dept Dated |7-O8-2OO7, the APSP Constables who were working in Prohibition & Excise Department on Deputation and declared as surplus in Police Department on deputation were absorbed as P&ECs in the existing Vacancies in Prohibition and excise departmenr duly lollowing the conditions: " I . Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organization of Local Cadres andRegulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 and other relevant rules rvhich are in vogue. )

2. They should be paid pay ald allowances and Scale of pay on par with Prohibition and Excise Constables. 3. They shall forego the benefits attached to the Constables in Police Department. 4. Their seniority shall be fixed commencing from the last candidate in theexisting seniority list of Prohibition and Excise Constables' Hence, the petitioner contention is true". Accordingly vide Cr. No. A2/7512013 Dated. 26-02 2014 this respondent fiialized the seniority list of absorbed APSP Constables

7. Respondent No'1 in letter dated O7-O4-2O12 h,.as sent the copy of letter of Additional Director General of Police, APSP Battalions, Hyderabad to all the Nodal Prohibition & Excise Superintendents (Now District Prohibition & Excise Officers) for preparation of seniority list of absorbed APSP constables by following the provisions of Rules 33 & 36 of Andhra Pradesh state and Subordinate Service Rules 1996 and instructions /guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No. 1103 dated 17 -O8-2OO7. Accordingly the provisional seniority list of APSP Constables allotted to Nizamabad District was prepared in Cr.No. A2l75l2Ol3, dated 1O-O4-2013. As per Cr. No' lO52O/2Or3lCPE/H3, dated O1-01-2O14, and Cr. No' A2175/2013, dated 18-11-2019, a revised provisional seniority I I I I I 6 ( list was prepared including 12 absorbed APSP Constables, subject to the outcome of pending OAs/WPs/ SLPs/Appeals. The post of APSP Constable is outside the Presidential Order, whiie Prohibition & Excise Constable is under it (80% local,2Oo/o open). As per (i.O.Ms.No.8 GA(SPFA), Dt. 08-O1-20O2, the first ,O, oS 6irect recruitment is by open merit, and 80% by locals.

7. It is further contended by Respondent No.2 that Due to non -availability of merit list; seniority was initially fixed by date of joining (Cr.No.363/A6 l2Ol2, Dt. 24-02-2012). OAs No.7947 l2t)12 & 6915/2013 were filed in APAT, which in final order Dt. 07 -O2-2O17 directed re-scrutiny of the 06-09-20 12 list based on Rules 33-38 of APSSSR, 1991. From the Proceedings it is clcar that Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, A.P., in Letter No. ti96o I 2016l CPE/ C3, Dt. 17 -O4-2O77 requested state merit list. lGP Battalions, Hyderabad, in R.C.No. A6l172l2016- 17, Dt. 37-07-2017, stated no common state merit list exists as selection u,as battalion-wise. However, in Rc.No. 606/A2l2O),7- 18, Dt. 15-O2 2018, IGP TSSP, Hyderabad furnished 1995 APSP merit hst. Recruitment was as per R.C. No. 224 /R&T I Admn I 2 I 94 , Dt. 06-07- 1994 by the State Level Police Recruitment Board with selection based on 3-Star test (75 7 marks) + Interview (25 marks). Merit list was later submitted I after Tribunal's persuasion.

8. In the back drop of the aforesaid pleadings, this Court is adjudicating this Writ Petition as infra' The APSP constables initially appointed as constables in APSP of Police Department, were sent on deputation to prohibition and excise department in the year 1995 and continued as such for some years. Subsequently, it was felt that APSP constables who have put in more than three years of service in excise department, shall be repatriated to their parent department. But, later, the Government had taken decision to absorb 2 15 I APSP constables who were working on deputation in excise department by GOMs.No. 1103 dated 17 -O8.2OO7, in the existing vacancies of excise constables duly foliowing the provisions of the Presidential Order and other relevant rules which are in vogue. They were absorbed after obtaining unequivocal/ irrevocable option from the APSP constable to the effect that they are willing to take scale of pay of prohibition and excise constables. In view of the undertaking and willingness given by way of option, their services were absorbed in various District units of the prohibition and exdise during the year S Ci 2OO9, in terms of GOMs.No.1l03 dated 17.O8.2OO7. Though the said exercisc was challenged by the interested persons the salne were dismissed by the Tribunal by frling OA.No.3335 of 2OO4 and batch. The Tribunal upheld the orders issued in GOMs.No. 11O3 dated 17.O8.2OO7, absorbing 2151 APSP constables in Prohibition & Excise Department. When the orders passed by the Tribunal were challenged before this Court, this Court also upheld the orders issued in GOMs.No.l lO3 dated 17.Oa.2OO7, in its order dated 26.03.2O09 in WP.No.8573 of 2OO8 and batch.

9. The post of police constable in APSP is not a locai cadre post, whereas the post of Prohibition and excise constable in the AP State excise service is in organized caclre, governed by the Presidential Order. As such, the post of APSP constable is a State-wide post and unit of appointment is not restricted to either Battalion or any unit. It is apparent from the pleadings and record that when the merit list of APSP Battalion constables, who were deputed to the excise depart-ment is not available as informed by the DG APSP Battalion, vide proceedings C.No.363/A6/2012 dated 24.O2.2012, there was no other option except to prepare a State list of APSP constables basing on the date of joining on deputation in prohibition and I J 9 excise department. On completion of allotments, the appointment authorities felt that the only possible way for fixing the seniority list is to take date of joining on deputation in the excise department and date of birth of the candidates as per Rule 33 & 36 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 ['APSSS Rules', for brevity). Accordingly, the Nodal Prohibition and Excise Superintendent have hnalized the seniority of absorbed APSP constables as per Rules 33 & 36 of APSSS Rules and considered promotions to the next higher cadre of prohibition and excise head constable in some Districts where there were vacancies.

10. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise who is Respondent No. t had initiated steps to prepare the seniority list of Excise Constables in the Excise Department based on the merit list as per Rule 33 to 38 of the APSSS Ruies with reference to merit list of selection of APSP Constables who are later absorbed as Prohibition and Excise Constables and wants to unsettle the settled seniority of Excise Constables issued by the 2 Respondent in the seniority list dated 15.06.2015 which was prepared based on the date of joining on deputation in the Prohibition & Excise Department and date of birth. Basing on the list of APSP Constables absorbed as Prohibition and Excise l0 Constables. combined seniority iist has been prepared by the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise taking the date of joining and age, if the date of joining is one and the same under Rule 33 to il6 of APSSS Rules. Basing on the list of absorbed APSP Constables, the Nodal Prohibition and Excise Superintendents concerned have prepared the seniority list of Prohibition & Excise Constables basing on the datc of joining and date of birth and promotion to the categor5' of Prohibition and Excise Head Constables were considered. Now, that is sought to lre disturbed by way of impugned proceedings. 1 1 . The competent authority had issued se niority list taking into account date ofjoining/date ol birth as the critcrion to determine the seniority among absorbed APSP Constables as all APSP Oonstables absorbed as Excise Constables in the Excise Department duly rejecting the objections liled. The post of Constable in the State Prohibition and Excise Department is organrzed into a separate cadre as per the said provision. As per Para 3 (8) of the Presidential Order, Central Government is empowered to notify any category to be excluded from organization of local cadre. In exercise of powers under Para 3 (8) of the Presidential Order, Government of India has issued notification on 18.1O. 1975 in G.S.R.No.529/8, excluding all I I categories of posts in the Special Police Battalions from the purview of the Presidential Order, and in view of such notification, the post of Police Constable in APSP is not a local cadre post, whereas the post of Prohibition and Excise Constable in the A.P. State Excise service is in organized cadre, governed by the Presidential Order as such, the post of APSP Constable is a State-wide post and the unit of appointment is not restricted to either Battalion or any unit. As per Rule 8(1)(a) of the Presidential Order, 80% of the posts are to be filled by direct recruitment from the local area of the unit and only 2Oo/o can be recruited from outside the unit i.e., District. The Director General, APSP Battalions vide C.No.363 I A6 I 2Ol2 dated

24.2.2012 informed that the merit list of APSP Constables who were deputed to Excise Department is not available. Therefore, there was no other option except to prepare a State list of APSP Constables basing on date of joining on deputation in Prohibition and Excise Department. Accordingly, an exercise has been taken up for implementing the Presidential Order taking the number of locals absorbed in the District and proportional 2Oo/o open quota to be filled from non-locals. Since the number of such Constables are more than the number that has given willingness, some Constables have to be compulsorily L 12 (' transferred to other Districts from where they are working at that time to maintain the minimum required proportion of Constables from local area i.e., 8O7o.Accordingly three options have been called for from such Constables lor allotment to the Districts other than where they are working at that point of time. On receipt of options, they have been allotted to the District opted by them or local area or nearby District with reference to availability of vacancies keeping in view the Presidential Order. On compleLion of allotments, the appointing authorities felt that the only possible way for Frxing the seniority list is to tzrke date of joining and date of birth of the candidates under Rule 33 and 36 of APSSS Rules. Accordingly, Nodal Prohibitior-r and Excise Superintendents have finalized the seniority of absorbed APSP Constables under Rule 33 and 36 of APSSS Rules and considered promotions to the next higher cadre of Prohibition and Excise Head Constables in some Districts where there are vacancies. Thereby the 1st Respondent had grossll' erred in issuing the impugned proceedings.

12. From the facts and the pleadings, this court comes to a clear conclusion that earlier the seniority list dated 18-11- 2019 vide proceedings in Cr.No. A2l75l2}l3was prepared as per the provisions of Rule 33 to 38 of the APSSS Rules which include the determination of seniorif based on the date of joining and age which method of determining seniority is in accordance with the provisions of the rules and is therefore valid and cannot be disturbed.

13. In the present case, it appears that the seniority list dated 18-11-2019 vide proceedings in Cr.No- A2/75/2}13was prepared as per the provisions of Rule 33 to 38 of the said rules, which include the determination of seniority based on the date of joining and age. Since it appears that there was no selection held for the purpose of promotion or appointment to the posts in question, seniority was determined based on the date of joining of absorbed APSP constables. This Court finds that in the absence of any selection list, it is not open to prepare a new senioriry list based on the merit obtained in APSP Battalions as per Rule 33 of the APSSS Rules. Therefore, the settled final seniority list prepared and confirmed in earlier vide Cr.No.A2l75l2o 13 Dated: lBlIll2}lg cannot be interfered with at this stage by the l"t Respondent Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise. The power to prepare and publish seniority lists is vested with the appointing authority or any other authority empowered to do so by the Government or any other competent authority. This Court finds that the l"t I I II I I l4 ! q / Respondent does not have the power or authority to direct the Nodal Officers to prepare a final seniority list based on the merit as per Rule 33 of the APSSS Rules, without any appeal being filed and u'ithout setting aside the said Iinai seniority lists prepared in various Districts.

14. This Court therefore, allows the Writ Petition setting aside the impugned orders dated 28.01 .2O2O of the l"t Respondent as the said proceeding is illegal. Respondents are directed tc-r forthwith consider the cases of Petitioners No. 4 to 7 for promotion to the post of Prohibition and Excise Head Constable as per the seniority list prepared by the 2nd Respondent bv Proceedings dated 18-11-2019 in the existing vacancies. No Costs.

15. Consequentiy, Miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed ,TRUE COPY// SD/. T.VIJAY KUMAR STRAR \ R!lY'-""r=J' \1 secrton o FFICER , \ \[t" ot Telangana Abkari To, \

7. I I \fl N ,lD 1 The Commlssroner of Prohibition and Excise' g'r,Iran f.lirPallY Road HYderabad' The District Pnrhibition and Excise Officer' Nizamabad' Nizamabad District The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise' Nizamabad' Nizamabad District. Department, State of The Princioal Secretary Prohibition and. Excise +;Ed;;;'s".rEiariat suitaings' Hvderabad 2 3 4

5. One CC to SRI P VENKATA SUBBARAO' Advocate [OPUCI 6, Two CCs to GP for Prohibltion & Excise' TJlangana at HYderabad [oUT] Two CCs to GP for Services-lll, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI One CC to SRI VADAPALLI RAMESH' Advocate IOPUC] High Court for the State of Two CD CoPtes I I HIGH COURT DATED i2810512025 1HE sr^it 6' o1'( ( o .J ./u 17 Juti 7 C) r) Ss,r, I C ..trO ORDER WP.No.2823 of 2020 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ftl6lar-