The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section i 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to suspend the operatron of the proceedings vide cr.No.02l201glcpE/B2 dated 28-01-2020 issued by the Respondent No.'l and consequential proceedings vide Rc No. '1 17120151P&ElA1 dated 20-06-2020 of Respondent No.2 pending disposal of this Writ Petition in the interest of justice lA NO: 3 OF 2020 Between: 3 4 1 2 Excise, State of Telangana, Abkari

1. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Bhavan, Nampally Road, Hyderabad. 2 The District Prohibition and Excise Officer, Warangal, Warangal Urban District. The Dgputy .Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Warangal, Warangal Urban District. The State of Telangana. Rep_ by its principal Secretary, prohibition and txcrse lJepartment. Secretariat Buildrngs, iiyderabad. ...PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS AND T.S^rinrvas S/o Narayana, Age. 51 Yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o.H.No. 20-5- 106. Fort Warangal West. Warangal Urban Dtstrict. K _Prabtakar S/o.Narsaiah, Age. 50 Yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o. H.No. 2- 7-511, Excise Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban.

3. lr4. Ramesh S/o Mallarah, Age 47 yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o. H.No. 2-4- 1515/4, Ashok Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban.

4. Ch. Ramesh S/o. Venkata Ralyam, Age.5l yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o. H No. 11-23-325. L B Nagar Warang-al Urbah Dist.

5. K Bhadraiah S/o. Danaiah, Age. 52 yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o H.No.2_ 10-60912. Teachers Colony, Phase-1, Hanmakonda Warangal Urban Diit. 6. N. Sammaiah S/o. Buchaiah, Age.49 yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o, H No. 7 Ch. Srinivas S/o. Somanna, Age.47 yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o. H.No. 2- 57-6-11, Rampur, Warangal Urb-an. 9-34912, Snehanagar, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban Dist. H No. 16-5-76/3, Near Railway Stn, perukawada, Warangal Urban.

8. S. Suresh Kumar S/o. Venkatesham, Age. 49 yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o. 9 | ^ '10.S. K. Ghouse S/o. Nannu, Age. 5i Yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o. H.No.6-1- y_a n a S/o. Ralagopat, Age. 49 yrs, Occ. p & E Constable, R/o. H.No.33-4-310, Lakshmipur, Timmapur Haveli, Warangal Urban Dist. S-a^ty^a n_a 1a

1081151348. NGOs Cotony, Mehboobabad.

11. K. Venkanna S/o. Bakkaiah, Age. 51 Yrs, Occ. P & E Constable, R/o. H.No.1- 4-11216185t281. Bypass Road, Ivlehaboobabad.

12.V. Sreenivils Kumar, S/o. Mallesham, Age. 49 Yrs, Occ. P & E Constable, R/o. H No. 23-6-2151E, New Shayampet, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban District 1 3. G, Hatchya S/o. Baliya, Age. 48 Yrs, Occ. P & E Constable, R/o. H.No. 1- 31 9/2, Hanumannagar, Bhoopalpally.

14. P. Ravinder S/o. Komraiah, Age. 52 Yrs, Occ. P & E Constable, R/o.Vangapadu Vill, Hasanparthy Mandal, Warangal Urban Dist. '15.8. Ramesh S/o Narsaiah, Age 51 Yrs, Occ. P & E Constable, R/o. H.No. 19- 12-40118, Nagendranagar, Warangal Urban. '16.V. Komraiar S/o. Narsaiah, Age.49 Yrs, Occ. P & E Constable, R/o. H.No. 54-2-112, Gundla Singaram, Sree Lakshminagar, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban Dist. ...RESPONDE:NTS/PETITIONERS 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 interinr order dated 30/06/2020 passed in W P.No.9393 ot 2020. Counsel for the P?titioners: SRI P. VENKATA SUBBA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION AND EXCISE GP FOR SERVICES.III The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 9393 OF 2O2O ORDER: Heard Sri P. Venkata Subba Rao, learned counsel for petitioners as well as learned Government Pleader for Prohibition & Excise.

2. This Writ Petition hled by the Petitioners seeking to set aside the proceedings Cr. No. O2l2OlBlCPElB2, dated: 2a-Ol2O2O issued by the 2"d Respondent and consequently, direct the 2"d Respondent to continue the Petitioners as Prohibition and Excise Head Constable at their respective place duly holding the final inter se seniority of Prohibition & Excise Constables of Warangal vide Proceedings Rc.No. 1 17 /2O15/P &E/Aldated: 20-06-2020 which is without any power any power or jurisdiction.

3. Petitioners are in Seniority list to be promoted as Head Constables according to the present vacancy position according to the seniority list. The Provisional and final seniority lists prepared by Respondent No.2 on the basis of merit had kept Petitioner No.l name in the list somewhere behind the I l others and the other Petitioners names also placed after many constables u'ho are younger to them. Respondent No. 1 already issued proceedings vide Cr.No. 19 l2O2O I CPE lB4 dated 2|-O1-2O2O to Respondents No.2 to prepare sgnkrrit_v lists in all the categoly of posts to which they are appointing authorities duly calling for objections and finalise the same duly following rules. Further Respondent No.1 issued proceedings vide Cr.No. 02 I 20 lB I C.PE I 82 dated 28-O 1 -2O2O ordering Respondent No.2 to re-fix seniority in terms of the orders of this Clourt in W.P.No. 26855 of 20 19 by sending the merit lists. Petitioners were originally selccted as APSP Constables and later on they were on deputation to the Prohibition and Excise Department. They were selected district-wise by the different APSP Battalions.

4. The Presidential Order is not :r.pplicable, the authorities, at the relevant time made selections for each battalion trcating each battalion consisting of one district or two districts as the case may be and made selections and appointment. It is respectfully submitted that on the ground that the Presidential order is not applicable, it cannot be presumed or mandate the concerned authorities to make selections and appointments at State level treating the APSP Battalions is a State level Post and admittedly, there is no such provision to treat the APSP Battalion as a State ievel post and it cannot be presumed to treat the Police Constables post of the APSP Constable post as State level Post, only on the ground that the Presidential order is not applicable in as much as the concerned appointing authorities got power to make recruitment for different units forming based on the on district or two districts as per administrative convenience. Petitioners and other concerned 2O00 APSP constables working in their respective battalions, the State took a decision to depute around 2,2OO APSP constables to Excise Department to work as Excise Constables after introduction of Prohibition in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

5. Subsequently, after completion of more than 15 years of service in the Excise Department, discharging duties and functions as Excise Constabies, the Government took a decision to absorb nearly 2,151APSP on and APSP Constables working in the Excise Department as Prohibition and Excise Constables in the Excise Department, subject to the condition t / J n l such Excise Constables who were absorbed from the cadre of APSP Constables, accept pay scales of the Excise Constable and their absorption should be as per the provisions of Presidential Order, in :rs much as the post of Excise Constables is governed by the Presidential Order, which is a district cadre post, artd accordingll, the Government issued G.O. Ms. No.1 103, Revenue (Excise) Department dated 17-08-2007, directing to absorb 2 151 APSP constables working in Prohibition and Excise Department on deputation and declared as surplus in the Police Department, with a condition that on absorption in to Prohibition and Excise Department, their seniority shall be fixed commencing from the last candidate in the existing seniority list of the Prohibition and Excise Constables, and also stating that such APSP Constables shall be absorbed in the existing vacancies in Prohibition and Excise Department, durly foilowing the instructions issued in A.P Public Employment (Organization of Local Cztdres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 and other relevant rules which are in vogue scrupulously after obtaining unequivocal/ irrevocable option from the APSP Constables to the effect that they are willing to accept the scale \ -) of pay of the Prohibition and Excise Constables as well as foilowing the communal and rule of reservation.

6. It is also pertinent to mention that when some of the absorbed APSP Constables challenged such absorption and allotments made to various districts following the seniorit5r based on the age criteria, the A-P Administrative Tribunal not interfered and rejected contentions with regard to allotment so made following marks as criteria and upheld the allotments so made based on the seniority which was determined following age as criteria and such orders of A.P Administrative Tribunal where also upheld by the Hon'ble High Court as u'ell as Hon'ble Apex Court, when aggrieved parties chaiienged before the Hon'ble High Court as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court. Subsequently, the concerned nodal authorities in each district i.e., Excise Superintendent (Nodal Authority) prepared and issued hnai senioriqr list of Prohibition and Excise Constables in each district tollowing age as criteria, in so far as Excise Constables who were deputed and subsequently absorbed in the department, and similarly the concerned authorities also made further promotions to the post of the Prohibition and Excise \ \ 6 Head Constable in the respective department as Prohibition and Excise Constable as well as Prohibition and Flxcise Head Constabli:s which are district cadre posts. 7 . Admittedly the appointing autt-rorities i.e., the District Prohibition and Excise Offrcer, the Respon<1ent No.2 in pursuance of instructions/ guidelines issued by the higher authorities including the Government or the Head of the Departme n t, wherein the authorities concerned issued instructions to prepare seniority of the absorbed trxcise Constables rvith effect from the date of their absorption and i taking into account the age of the Excise constables, in as much as all the APSP constables who were absorbed/appointed on the same day and therefore when more than one candidate get appointment on the same day, age is the appropriatc criteria to determine the seniority, and admittedly the concerned authorities,/appointing authority issued linal seniority list in the cadre of the Prohibition and Excise Constables only etfter issuing the provisional seniority list ald after receiving objections from the a5grieved parties, duly considering their objections. 1

8. Competent authority Respondent No.2 prepared provisional seniority list vide proceedings Rc.No. I 17 / 2Ol5 lP&E/A 1 dated |O-O2-2O2O , after issuing provisional senioriry list, after obtaining objections from the effected parties, the Respondent No.2 prepared the final seniority lists vide proceedings Rc.No. 117 l2OlSlP&E/Al dated 20-06 2O2O. It rs very pertinent to mention that the authorities prepared such a seniority list in the district not following the same criterion and principle, i.e., following age as criterion, in as much as all the Excise constables absorbed afresh in the Excise department on the same day of 28-O5-2009, not only in the State of Telangana but also in the State of Andhra Pradesh as the seniority lists were prepared in certain districts prior to 02-06-2014. The authorities reckoned the Petitioners seniorily only from 28-O5- 2OO9 i.e., the day absorption, treating us as direct recruiters. Therefore, following the so called merit ranking is misconceived and unsustainable if not doing undue favour to some o[ the candidates among us absorbed on the same date. Respondent No.2 prepared seniority lists basing on the merit lists as criteria. The merit system is not to be applied to all the constables ) s absorbed on the same date from various battalions of APSP. Even these lists also prepared by not correctly placing the constables according to the date of birth as criteria. g. The Respondent No. I is not the appellate authority against the orders passed by Respondent No.2, as per provisions ol AP State and Sub-ordinate Service Rules, in as much as r,hc Higher authority to the Respondent No.2 is the Respondent No.3 and admittedly Respondent No. 1 is the Head of the Departmcnt, in other words Respondent No.l may be revisional authority but not appeltate authority. yet the private Responden ts after lapse of limitation filed the so called appeals representations from other districts and the Respondent No.1 issued the impugned orders to the Respondent No.2. 1O. Respondent No.2 prepared a hnal seniority list basing on the merit dated 20-O6-202O, which is not at all available to the absorbed Constables in the Excise Department and some of the Petitioners along with others gave representation, even before preparing the merit lists stating the facts of their absorption into the Prohibition and Excise Department and rules governed for the promotion of the existing I 9 Prohibition and Excise Constables who were absorbed from the APSP Constables to the Respondent No.2. In the representation clearly submitted required authorities regarding the promotion rules to be followed. Respondent No. I ought to have rejected such appeal/ representations from other districts not only on the ground that Respondent No.1 is not an appellate authority but also on other grounds i.e., hling such appeal/ representations without impleading the affected parties Respondents in the said appeals, the Respondent No. I directed Respondent No.2 vide Cr. No.l9 /2O2O /CPE/84 dated 21-O1-2O2O to prepare the seniority lists in all the category of posts to which they are appointing authorities duly calling for objections and finalise the same duly following the rules. They are further instructed that after finalization of seniorit5r lists identify the vacant posts in each category and filI up the same with the candidates from the feeder category duly taking into consideration the eligibility criteria for promotions.

12. Respondent No.2 in their counter affrdavit has stated that in the year 1996, since then they were on deputation in the prohibition and Excise Department up to the year 2007 t0 Government after careful examination of the entire issue, order that the 11, 15 1 Andhra Pradesh Special Armed Police (APSP) Constablcs vl'erc deputed to the State Excise Department, namely tt-re Prohibition and Excise DepartmEnt. Subsequently, by G.O.Ms.No. i 103, Revenue (Excise-l) Department, dated ),7 .Oa.2OO7, the Government directed the absorption of 2,151 APSP Constables who were working on deputation in the Prohibition and Excise Department and declared surplus in the APSP. Such absorption was subject to adherence to the Andhra Pradesh Pubtir: trmployment (Organization of Local Cadre and Regulatior-r oI Direct Recruitment) Orders, 1975, and other applicablt' rtrlcs, lollowing receipt ol their unequivocal and irrevocable option to accept the pay scale applicable to Prohibition ancl Excise Constables. It was further directed that their senioritv shall be fixed from the last czrndidate in the existing seniority list of the Prohibition and Excise Constables. 13, Ir.r this matter, the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad Cr.No. 1765712OO4/CPE/H3, dated 22-O5-2OOS have issued orders to rhe Prohibition and Excise Superintendents in the State to implement the orders of the Government and absorb Andhra Pradesh Special Police Constables as Prohibition and Excise Constables in the existing vacancies in Prohibition and Excise Department duly lollowing the instructions issued in the Andhra Pradesh Public. Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975and other relevant rules which are in vogue scrupulously after obtaining unequivocal / irrevocable option from the Andhra Pradesh Special Police Constables to the effect that they are willing to accept the pay scale of pay ol Prohibition and Excise Constables.

14. Accordingly, orders were issued vide Prohibition Excise Superintendent Warangal Rc.No.478l2009lPE/Al, dated:27-O5-2O09 duly absorbing (108) number of Andhra Pradesh Special Police Constables into Prohibition and Excise Department duly following the procedure and subject to the conditions laid above in Government orders.

15. Respondent No.2 in their counter affidavit stated that as per the guidelines cf Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Telangana State, Hyderabad the seniority list of Andhra Pradesh Special Police Constables absorbed in Excise Department has been issued as a criteria of date of birth and seniority has been hxed after the last candidate in the existing seniority list of Prohibition and Excise Constable vide Prohibition and Excise Superintendent Warangal Rc.No. 1 17 / 20 15 / P&E/A 1, Dt:06-O I -20 18. 16. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Telangana State Hyderabad vide reference Cr.No.02l2018lCPEl82 Dated:28-Ol-2O2O instructed the Nodal Dist rict Prohibition and Excise Off-rcers to prepare the seniority list ol absorbed Prohibition and Excise Constables in view of the orders of the Hon'ble High Court of Telangaaa State at Hyderabad in W.P. No.31978 of 2018,W.P. No.67O1 of 2018 and W.P. No.26855 of 2O19.The Hon'ble Higtr Court of Telangana State at Hyderabad has issued orders in W.P. No.26855 of2019.

17. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Telangana State, Hyderabad has enclosed merit list of Andhra Pradesh Special Police Coistables recruited during the year 1995 and absorbed in Prohibition and Excise Department which clearly shows that the Petitioners selected as Andhra Pradesh Special Police Constables in respective battalions basing on the merit and as per the merit list the Andhra Pradesh Special Police Constables who were selected in the.year 1995 were recruited in the year 1995 and 1996 and ailotted to the Prohibition and Excise Department in year 1996 and respective Commandants enclosed common merit list of Andhra Pradesh Special Police Constables recruited in the year 1995 and 1996 as per merit. Moreover, all the Andhra Pradesh Special Police Constabies deputed in the year 1996 were absorbed in the Prohibition and Excise Department in the year 2OO7'

18. Preparing revised final seniority list based on the so called merit/marks, is contrary to the decision taken earlier by the Government as well as the Head of the Department, which was the basis for making allocations, which was upheld by the Tribunal, as well as the Hon'ble High Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

19. Respondent No. I directed Respondeht No.2 vide proceedings in Cr. No. O2l2OB/CPDIE.2, dated 28-O|-2O2O to furnish the list of constables absorbed from the APSP pertaining \ a _, t I l.+ to the district. To complete the exercise of re-fixation of seniority in terms of the orders of this Court in W.P.No. 26855 of 2O19 pertaining to the district. The Respondent No. 1 sent merit lists along with the above stated proceedings to prepare the seniority lists. This Court in the W.P.No. 26855 of 2019 not directed the Respondent No.1 regarding the consideration of any merit list. The order directed Respondent No. I to dispose the appeals in accordance with law. Respondent No.2 after receiving the proceedings dated 28-Ol-2020 from Respondent No. 1 prepared lrnal seniority lists vide proceedings Rc.No. 1 17 l2Ol5/PeD/A1 dated 20 -06- 2O2O by considering the merit lists instead of considering age criteria of the absorbed APSP Constables into the Prohibition and Excise department. The APSP battalions recruited the candidates on the basis of the Physical efficiency test and therc is no parameter for concluding for the merit of the candidate.

20. In the backdrop of the above contentions of the respective parties, this Court is adjudicating the present Writ Petition as infra. All the APSP Constables, those who joined the Prohibition and Excise department gave unequivocal/ l5 irrevocable option to abide by the G.O.Ms. No. 1103, Revenue (Excise) Department dated 17-08-2007 and seniority shall be fixed commencing from the last candidate in the existing seniority list of the Prohibition and Excise Constables according to the individual age criteria.

21. This Court in Writ Petitions No. 2823 of 2O2O and, 24941 of 20 19 passed the following order on |9-O2-2O2O. 'Prima-facie, from the hearing of learned counsels, it is noticed that three aspects require consideration. With reference to determination of inter se seniority at the time of initial selections of police constables in the Special Battalions, the selections were made based on the physical assessment of the candidates which is not the normal method of recruitment; there was no merit list circulated to the Excise Department, rvhen they were absorbed; the seniority lists are sought are sought to be revised by a new formula, on a direction issued by the Commissioner of Excise on appeal. Whereas the seniority lists were hnalized at the level of Districts. The Commissioner passed orders to determine seniority based on the merit secured by the candidates in the Battalions. The decision of Commissioner u'as not rvith prior notice or opportunity to thc persons whose placements were shown in the frnal seniority lists in the respective units of appointment. It appears that the candidates werc drawn from different Speciat Police Battalions to silgle unit of appointment in Excise Department. 'Ihere was no common merit list clubbing all Battalions, when the recruitment was made, more so, when the selections were based on physical efhciency, there 1 I I I II 7 l6 could not have been a merit list assessing the merit of the cancliclates and the merit of the candidates, even drawn in that manner in different Battalions, cannot be the criteria to determine inter se seniority". Having regard to the above, the matter requires consicleration as to q,hat would be the procedure for determination of interse seniority of al1 those police constables, who are absorbed into the Excise Depar tment. As th('se issues require consideration, the Respondents are directed not to effect promotions, at this stage for the caclre of Head Constables. Counler to be filed in W.P. No. 2823 ol 2O2O. lt is open to the Government to deal with the above aspects in the coullter aflidavit. It is also opcn to the Government to file additional coulrter af{idavit in W.l'] No. 24941 if 2019 dealing with these aspects". Even after this Court passed the above order Respondent No.2 is not intending to follow the above order and going ahead stating that he has no direction from this Court or Respondent No.1 has not issued any proceedings to prepare the seniority lists basing on merit as criteria.

22. In the back drop of the aforesaid pleadings, this Court is Adjudicating this Writ Petition as infra. APSP Constables initially appointed as constables in APSP of Police Department, $rere sent on deputation to prohibition and excise department in the year 1995 and continued as such for some t7 years. Subsequently, it was feit that APSP Constables who have put in more than three years of service in excise department, shall be repatriated to their parent department. But, 1ater, the Government had taken decision to absorb 2 15 1 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 following 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 excise during the year 2OO9, in terms of GOMs.No. 1 103 dated 17 .O8.2OO7. Though the said exercise was challenged by the interested persons the same were dismissed by the Tribunal by filing OA.No.3335 of 2OO4 and batch. The Tribunal upheld the orders issued in GOMs.No. I 1O3 dated ).7.O8.2OO7, absorbing 2151 APSP constabies 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. I 1O3 dated 17.Oa.2OO7, in its order dated 26.03.2009 in WP.No.8573 of 2008 and batch.

23. The post of police constable in APSP is not a local cadre post, whereas the post of Prohibition and excise constable in the AP 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 unit of appointment is not restricted to either Battalion or any unit.

24. It is apparent from the pleadings and record that I when the merit list of APSP Battalion constables, who were deputed to the excise department is not available as informed by the DG APSP Battalion, vide p.o..edi.,g= C.No.363/A6l2O 12 dated 24.O2.2012, there was no other option except to prepare a State list o I APSP constables basing on the date ol joining on deputation in prohibition and excise department. On completion of allotments, the appointment authorities felt that the only possible way for hxing the seniority list is to take date of joining on deputation in the excise department and date of birth of the l9 candidates as per Rule 33 & 36 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 I'APSSS Rules', for breviry). Accordingly, the Nodal Prohibition and Excise Superintendent have Ilnalized the seniority of absorbed APSP constables as per Rules 33 & 36 ofAPSSS Rules and considered I promotions to the next higher cadre of prohibition and excise head constable in some Districts where there were vacancies.

25. The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise who is Respondent No.1 had initiated steps to prepare the seniority list of Excise Constables in the Excisc Department based on the merit list as per Rule 33 to 38 of the APSSS Rules 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 & trxcise Department and date of birth. Basing on the list of APSP Constables absorbed as Prohibitioir and Excise Constables, combined seniority list has been prepared by the Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise taking the date of 2t) joining and age, if the date of joining is one and the same under Rule 33 tc, 36 of APSSS Rules. Basing on the list of absorbed APSP Constables, the Nodal Prohibition zrnd Excise Superintendents concerned have prepared the scniority list of Prohibition & Excise Constables basing on the date of joining and date of birth and promotion to the category of Prohibition and Excisc Head Constables were considered. Now, that is sought to be disturbed by way of impugned proceedings. The competent authority had issued seniority list taking into account date of joining/date of birth as the critcrion to determine the seniority among absorbed APSP Constables as all APSP Constables absorbed as Excise Constables in the Excise Department duly rejecting the objections filed.

26. The post of Constable in the State Prohibition and Excise Deperrtment is organized into a separate cadre as per the said provision. As per Para 3 (8) of the Presidential Order, Central Govcrnment is empowered to notify anv category to be excluded lrom organization of local cadre. In exercise of powers under Para 3 (8) of the Presidential Order, Government of lndia has issue<l notification on 18. 10.1975 in G.S.R.No.52g lE, i 21 excluding all categories of posts in the Special Police Battalions from the purview of the Presidentiai Order, and in view of such notification, the post of Police Constable in APSP is not a local cadre post, whereas the posl 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 ol 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 2O% can be recruited from outside the unit i.e., District. The Director General, APSP Battalions vide C.No-3631A6/2012 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 ald 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 2O%o open quota to be filled from non-locals. Since \ \\\ r the number of such Constables are more than the number that has given willingness, some Constables have to be compulsorily transferrccl to other Districts from where they are working at that time to maintain the minimum requfed proportion of Constables from local area i.e., 80To.Accordingly three options have been called for from such Constables for allotment to the Districts other than where they are working at that point of time. On rcceipt of options, they have been allotted to the I District opted by them or local area or nearby District with reference to availability of vacancies keeping in view the Presidential Order. On completion of allotments, the appointing authorities felt that the only possible way for fixing Lhe seniority list is to take date of joining and date of birth of thr: candidates under Rule 33 and 36 ot APSSS Rules. Accordingly, Nodal Prohibition and Excise Superintendents have hnalized the seniority ol absorbed APSP Constables under Rule 33 and 36 ol APSSS Rules and considered promotions to the next higher cadre of I'rohibition and Excise Head Constables in some Districts rvhere there are vacancies. Thereby the lst Respondent had grossll erred in issuing the impugned proceedings. From the facts and pleadings, this Court comes to

27. a clear conclusion that earlier the seniori$ list dated 18-11-2O19 vide proceedings in Cr.No. A2175/2013 was I prepared as per the provisions o[ Rules 33 to 38 of the APSSS Rules which include determination of seniority based on the date of joining and age which method of determining scniority is in accordance with the provisions of the rules and is therefore valid and cannot be disturbed which include the determination of seniority based on the date of joining and age. Since it appears that there was no selection held for 2a. the purpose of promotion or appointment to the posts in question, seniorit5z 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 seniority 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 conhrmed in earlier vide Cr.No. A2l75l2Ol3 dated 18-11-2019 cannot be interfered with at this stage by the 1"t Respondent Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise. The power to prepare and publish seniority lists is \ ) 21 vested with the appointing authority or any other authority empowererl to do so by the Government or any other competent authority. This Court linds that the lst Respondent does not have the po\^/er or authority to direct the Nodal C)fficers to prepare a final seniority list based on the merit as per Rule 33 of the APSSS Rules, without any appeal being filed and without setting aside the said final seniority lists prepared in various Districts.

29. This Court therefore, comes to a conclusion that seniority lists of Respondent No.1 vide Cr.No. 02l2018lCPE,l82 dated:28 OI-2O2O and consequential proceedings vide Rc.No. ll7 /2Ol5lP&E/Al dated 20 06-2020 of Respondent No.2 are arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory, mala fide and unconstitutional violating Articles 14, 16 and 2 I of the Constitution oI India and as well as contrary to the A.P.Telangana State Subordinate Service Rules, hence, they are set aside. Respondents are directed t() forthvvith consider promotion to the post of Prohibition and Excise Head Constable as per the seniority list prepared by Respondent No.2 by Proceedings vide Rc.No. 117 /2Ol5lP&E/A1 dated 06-01-2018 in the existing vacancies. t5 I

31. The Writ Petition is accordingly, allowed. No costs' Consequently, Miscellaneous Applications, if ar.ry shall stand closed. ,TRUE COPY// \ To, .1 . The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise' Bhavan, Nampally Road, HYderabad'

2. The District Prohibition and Excrse Offtcer, District. SD/-P. GOWRI SHANKAR DEPUTY REGI SECTION OFFICER of Telangana, Abkari Warangal, Warangal Urban

3. The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise' Warangal' Warangal Urban District. 4 The Princioal Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department' State of Telangana. Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad'

5. One CC to SRI P VENKATA SUBBA RAO, Advocate IOPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP for Prohibition & Excise' High Court for the State of Telangana at HYderabad. [OUT]

7. Two CCs to GP for services-lll, High court for the state of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

8. Two CD CoPies IVP *-P" \---r.- HIGH COURT DATE D:28 10512025 gE SIar 1nc 1? JUt{ zffi fscr,.TC\r ."9. /t -)c I \ \ (i i,. ORDER WP.No.9393 of 2020 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ( I