'l . Ch. Bixapathi v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order of direction, preferably one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and to declare the lmpugned Proceedings No.SE/QC & ICA//GL./ES.lll72O and 711 dated 1011012019 issued by the 3rd respondent by reverting the petitioners from Work lnspector Grade-l to Grade-lll and lV w.e.f ., 'l 989 to 1 996 after lapse of 2 decades the said action of the respondents is highly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory and also in violation of Art. 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and declare the same as bad in law and set-aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioners as Work lnspectors Grade-l in the 3rd respondent control. lA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 SUSPEND the lmpugned Proceedings No.SE/QC & ICMGL./ES.ttl72O and 211 dated 1011012019 issued by the 3rd respondent and direct the respondents to continue the petitioners as Work lnspectors Grade-l in the 3rd respondent office pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Between: ,| The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, lrrigation and C-ommand Area (PW) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hydera6ad - 500 022. 2 J 4 The Engineer-in-Chief, (l.W), Errum lr/anzil, '1st Floor, Jalasoudha Building, Hyderabad. The Superintending Engineer, land CADD, Quality Control Circle and lnspection, Warangal. The Executive Engineer, QC and I Division No.5, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. AND 1 2 Ch. Bixaqathi,_S_/q DasJralatha, Aged about 56 years, Occ- Work lnspector Grade-|, O/o. QC And I Division No.5, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. Md. Mohinuddin, S/o. Abdul Jabbar, Aged about 55 years, Occ- Work lnspector Grade-|, O/o. QC and I Division No.5, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. ...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 interim order dated 25-'10-2019 in W.P. No.23394 of 2019. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C.RAJA SEKHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-l WRIT PETITION NO: 13595 OF 2020 Between:

1. Ch. Srinivas Rao, S/o. Venkataratnam, Aged about 56 Years, Occ. Work lnspector Grade-ll, O/o. Executive Engineer Division No.1, Construction Circle, Hanmakonda, K.Camp, Warangal Urban District,

2. B. Rama Murthy, S/o. B. Jagannadham, Aged about 55 Years, Dec. Work lnspector Grade-ll, O/o. Executive Engineer Division No.1 , Construction Circle, Hanmakonda, K.Camp, Warangal Urban District.

3. T. Komuraiah, S/o- T. Ramachandram, Aged about 56 Years, Occ. Work lnspector Grade-lll, O/o. Executive Engineer Division No. l, Construction Circle, Hanmakonda, K.Camp, Warangal Urban District. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, lrrig Command Area (PW) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderab 022. ation and ad - 500

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, (lW), Errum Manzil, '1st Floor, Jalasoudha Building, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintending Engineer, land CADD, Construction Circle, K.Camp, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban District.

4. The Executive Engineer, land CAD, Division No.l of CC, K.C. Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban District. ..RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased lo issue an appropriate Writ, Order of direction, preferably one in the nature of Writ of lVlandamus and to declare the lmpugned Proc. No.SE/CCH/ESlE3l2O2OlB53, 851 and 852, 30-07-2020 respectively issued by the 3rd respondent, reverting the petitioners from the post of Work lnspector Grade-ll to Work lnspector Grade- lV w.e.f., from 1987, BB and 89, that to be after lapse of 3 decades the said action of the respondents is highly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory, without any application of mind and also in violation of Art 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and declare the same as bad in law and set-aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioners as Work lnspectors Grade-ll and Grade - lll respectively in the 3rd respondent control. tA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 SUSPEND the lmpugned Proc. No.SE/CCHlESlE3l2020l853, 851 and 852, 30-07 -2020 respectively issued by the 3rd respondent and direct the respondents to continue the petitioners as Work lnspectors Grade-ll and Grade - lll respectively in the 3rd respondent office pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2020 Between: '1 . The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, lriigation and Command Area (PW) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad - 500 o22.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, (lW), Errum [Vlanzil, 1st Floor, Jalasoudha Building, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintending Engineer, land CADD, Construction Circle, K.Camp, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban District.

4. The Execulive Engineer, land CAD, Division No.l of CC, K.C. Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban District. ...PETITIONERS AND 2 1 Ch. Srinivas.. Rao, S/o. Venkataratnam, Aged about 56 Years, Occ. Work lnspector Grade-ll, O/o. Executive Engineer Division No. l, Construction Circle, Hanmakonda, K.Camp, Warangal Urban District, B. Rama l\ilurthy, S/o. B. Jagannadham, Aged about 55 Years, Dec. Work lnspector Grade-ll, O/o. Executive Engineer Division No.1, Construction Circle, Hanmakonda, K.Camp, Warangal Urban District. T. Komuraiah, S/o. T. Ramachandram, Aged about 56 Years, Occ. Work lnspector Grade-lll, O/o. Executive Engineer Division No.1, Construction Circle, Hanmakonda, K.Camp, Warangal Urban District. J 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 ...RESPONDENTS vacate the interim or ordered 24lo1l202o in l.A. No. 1 ol 2o2o in w.p.No. i 3595 ot 2020. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI C.RAJA SEKHAR REDDY Counsel forthe Respondents: Gp FOR SERVICES-I WRIT PETITION NO: 23094 OF 2020 Betwei:n: 1 2 !. Ralnes!, S/o Prabaiah, Aged about 50 years, Workino as Work lnsoector -CCH, Grit, O/o Superinlending !1Sine_er, Construction Circte, bivlsion N;i, Hanamakonda, Warangal Urbran District. A. Kistaiah, S/o Yellaiah, Aged about 57 years, Working as Work lnspector Gr.-lIl, O/o Superintending E-ngineer, Construction Circle,"Divisio; No t,-CCif , Hanamakonda, Warangal Urban District. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 The State,of Telang.ana, Represented by its principal Secretary, lrrigation and U^ommand Area (PW) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hydera6ad _ 500 022.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, (l.W), Errum Manzil, i st Floor, Jalasoudha Building, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintendjng Engineer, Construction Circle, Division No.1 , CCH, Hanamakonda, Warangaf Urban District.

4. T.he Executive. Fngineer,_l and CADD, Division No.1 of CCH, K.C. Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order of direction, preferably one in the nature of writ of Mandamus and to declare the lmpugned proceedings No.SE/ccH/ESlE3l2o2ot1342 and 1344, dated 0211212020 issued by the 3rd respondent by reverting the petitioners from work lnspector Grade-ll and lll to Grade - IV w.e.f., 1989 to 2oo4 after lapse of 16 to 30 years, the said action of the respondents is highly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminatory and also in violation of Att. 14, 16 and 2i of the constitution of lndia and declare the same as bad in law and set-aside the same and consequenfly direct the respondents to continue the petitioners as Work inspectors Grade-ll and Grade-lll respectively, in the 3rd respondent control. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 SUSPEND the lmpugned Proceed ings No.SE/CCH/ES I E3|2O2O I 1 342 and 1 344, dated 0211212020 issued by the 3rd respondent and direct the respondents to continue the petitioners as Work lnspectors Grade-ll and Grade-lll respectively, in the 3rd respondent office pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2021 Between:

1. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Irrig Command Area (PW) Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderab o22. ation and ad - 500

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, (l.W), Errum lv1anzil, 1st Floor, Jalasoudha Building, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintending Engineer, Construction Circle, Division No.1, CCH, Hanamakonda, Warangal Urban District.

4. The Executive Engineer, I and CADD, Division No.1 of CCH, K.C. Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 U. Ramesh, S/o Prabaiah, Aged about 50 Years, Working as Work lnspector Grit, O/o Superinlending Engineer, Construction Circle, Division Not, CCH, Hanamakonda, Warangal Urban District. A. Kistaiah, S/o Yellaiah, Aged about 57 Years, Working as Work lnspeclor Gr.-lll, Oio Superintending Engineer, Construction Circle, Division No '1 , CCH, Hanamakonda, Warangal Urban District. 2 ...RESPONDENTS 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 lnterim Order granted 17.12.2020 passed in W.P.No. 23094 of 2020 and dismiss the Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C.RAJA SEKHAR REDDY Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-I The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER 1 wp_23394 2019 & wp 13595 & 23094 2020 NBK,I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.23394 of 2019 AND WRIT PETITION Nos.13595 and23094 of 2O2O COMMON ORDER: The petitioners, who are rendering services as Work lnspector Grade-I, have been reverted to their earlier post with retrospective effect, on the ground that they were illegally promoted, and that they do not have requisite technical qualification when they were initially promoted decades ago. In view of the commonality of issue and grievance, the writ

2. petitions are taken up for disposal by way of this Cornmon Order. For reference and discussion, the facts in W.P.No.23394 of 2019 are taken.

3. Petitioner No.l was appointed as Man-Mazdoor (manual worker) in the 3'd respondent-Irrigation & Command Area Development Department in 1986, and petitioner No.2 in 1987. Subsequently, they obtained promotions as Work Inspector Grade-IV, and later Grade-Ill, and so on, ultimately as Work Inspector Grade-l in the year 2007. On an anonymous complaint dated 13.08.2018 received by the 2'l respondent/Engineer-in-Chief stating that the petitioners do not have the technical qualification certificate from the year 1992 onwards, a Memo dated 14.06.2019 was issued to the petitioners (and also to certain retired personnel). The petitioners submitted a detailed representation dated 2 wp_23394_2019 & wp_13595 & 23094_2020 NBK,,J \

20.08.2019 by referring to the Order dated 29 .01 .2008 passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.3 I 3 8 of 2004, in a similarly situated case of one Mr. Reddy Papi Naidu, Work lnspectoq and the writ petition W.P.No.7559 of 2008 filed by the respondent authorities against the Order dated29.01 .2008 in OA.No.3138 of 2024,was dismissed by this Court by order dated 08.04.2008. It is the contention ofthe petitioners that they too are on the verge of retirement, and therefore the impugned action of reversion to earlier post, after decades of service, is illegat.

4. Heard Mr. C. Rajasekhar Reddy, leamed counsel for the petitioners; and leamed Government Pleader for Services-I. Perused the record.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioneq while making submissions on the lines of writ affidavit, would contend that the petitioners were promoted way back during 1989 & 1996 as Work Inspector Grade-IV,, and subsequently they obtained funher promotions, and the action of the authorities in reverting the petitioners to earlier post, after decades of serv'ice, that too on the verge of their retirement of is illegal. Learned Government Pleader, based on the counter affidavit, would

6. contend that on the complaint received by the authorities that the petitioners do not have necessary technical qualification at the initiaI stage of promotion in the year 1992, the matter was examined and it was found that the promotion of petitioners is illegal as they do not have required technical qualification to serve in the promoted grade. Therefore, they have been reverted to the lower Grade, commensurate with their qualifications. It is contended that the authorities are now taking action by considering the eligibility criteria, as the earlier promotions were not .l wp_23394 2019 & wp 13595 & 23094 2020 NB(, J given on merit/eligibility but due to the arbitrary action which went unnoticed for years. It is contended that when other employees approached the respondent authorities for promotion (seeking similar dispensation as that of the petitioners), the authorities denied such requests for promotion on the ground ofqualification, and therefore, there is no illegalify in the action of the respondent authorities in reverting the petitioners to earlier posts, as the impugned action has been taken to correct/rectiff the earlier illegality and arbitrariness.

7. Having considered the respective submissions and perused the record, it may be noted that the petitioners were appointed. during 198611987 as man-mazdoor (manual labour) in the respondent- Department. Even as per the counter affidavit, the petitioner No.l has SSC + ITI qualification (and hence eligible for Work lnspector Grade-lll position), and petitioner No.2 has SSC qualification (and hence eligible for Work Inspector Grade-IV position). [t is to be noted that non- verification oftechnical qualifications, at the time ofgranting subsequent promotions,, cannot be the fault of the petitioners in the first place, and admittedly they performed duties for decades until they got their latest promotions as Works Inspector Grade-I. Further, even as per the counter affidavit (at page Nos 5 and 6), the duties of different Grades of Work Inspector do not differ either in skills or abilities or nature ofduties. It is to be noted that in WP.No.7559 of 2008, the Hon'ble Division

8. Bench of this Court, while dismissing the writ petition by order dated 08,04.2008, observed as follows: 4 wp_23394 2019 & wp 13595 & 23094_2020 NBK, J "On a perusal of the aforesaid G.O., it is quite clear that the persons who were sought to be appointed as Works lnspector must have three years experience as Works lnspector GradelV besides lTl certificate or its equivalent qualification. Though the respondent did not possess the qualification of lTl, he was promoted as works lnspector Grade-lll and thereafter as Works lnspector Grade-ll and the admitted position that he had been working as such for a considerable time. However, the Department having realized that the respondent has been wrongly promoted as Works lnspector Grade-lll and Il, issued the impugned order of reversion on 4.3.1996 nearly after a period of eight and half years. The Tribunal taking into consideration the fact that no show cause notice was issued to the respondent before the impugned order of reversion was passed and considering the fact that the respondent has put in more than ten years of service in the post of Works lnspector, rvhile relying on the judgments of the Supreme Court in GUJARAT AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY vs. RATHOD LABHU BECHARAND OTHERS (2001 AIR SCW 351) and M. BUCHA REDDY vs. BHAGYAMMA AND OTHERS ({ 999) (6) ALD 58)) allowed the said O.A. while setting aside the order of reversion. ln the circumstances, we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order of the Tribunal warranting interference. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. "

9. Further, after the dismissal of W.P.No.7559 of 2008, a Memo dated 29.07 .2008 was issued by the Principal Secretary to Government (FAC), which reads as follows: "The attention of Engineer-in-Chief (lW), lrrigation & C.A.D Department, Hyderabad is invited to the references cited. He is informed that after careful examination of the matter, Government t I / //// - 5 wp_23394 2019 & wp_13s95 & 23094_2020 NBK,I have observed that the applicant viz., Sri Reddy Papi Naidu, Work Inspector, is on the yerge of retirement and the A.P. Administrative Tribunal / Hon'ble High Court orders have gone in his favour. Filing an S.L.P. in Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndia may not be the most appropriate step. He is directed to implement the orders of A.P.A.T dated 29-1- 2008 in O.A.No.3138/2004 to continue Sri Reddy Papi Naidu as Work lnspector, Gr.ll and report compliance."

10. In the instant case, the petitioners, having been appointed in the year 1986187, rendered services for almost more than three decades and are undoubtedly on the verge of retirement. The arb itrariness/illegal it ies whatsoever occurred in granting further promotions to the petitioners (over and above their actual qualification for promotion), cannot be f { attributable to the petitioners. Furthermore, the I't respondent, by Memo dated29.07.2008 has felt itnot appropriate to carry the matter in SLP before the Supreme Court as the petitioner therein (Mr. Reddy Papi Naidu) was on the verge of retirement. 1 l. The action of the authorities in denying promotions to other candidates due to non-possessing of prescribed educationaVtechnical qualifications cannot be faulted; however, the authorities cannot adopt the same denial dispensation towards the petitioners herein, at this distance of time, after availing their services for more than two decades in the promoted/higher posts. Therefore, this Court finds itjust and reasonable that the petitioners deserve equitable treatment (as that of the petitioner 6 wp_23394_2019 & wp 13595 & 23094 2020 NBK,I in WP.No.7559 of 2008), as the petitioners herein are also at the fag end of their careers.

12. In that view of the matter, the action of respondent authorities in reverting the petitioners to a lower Grade with retrospective effect, is not sustainable in [aw.

13. Accordingll', the writ petitions are allowed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. That Rule Nisi has made Absolute as above witness The Hon'ble SRI SUJOY PAUL, The Acting Chief Justice on this Wednesday, the Twenty Eighth Day of May, Two Thousand and Twenty Five. I \ To, //TRUE COPY// S /- A. SRINIVASA REDDY SISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER C

1. The Principai Secreta ry, li-rigation and Com nd Area (PW) Department, Secretariat B uildings, Hyderabad, State of Te angana - 500 022

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, (l.W), Errum Manzil, 1st Floor, Jalasoudha Building, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintending Engineer, land CADD, Quality Control Circle and lnspection, Warangal.

4. The Superintending Engineer, Construction Circle, Division No.1, CCH, Hanamakonda, Warangal Urban District.

5. T.he Superintending Engineer, I and CADD, Construction Circle, K.Camp, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban District..

6. The Executive.Engineer, I and CADD, Division No.1 of CCH, K.C. Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal District. 7 The Executive Engineer, QC and I Division No.5, Hanmakonda, Warangal District.

8. The Executive..Engineer,.l and CAD, Division No.l of CC, K.C. Colony, Hanmakonda, Warangal Urban Diskict.

9. One CC to SRI C.RAJA SEKHAR REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl 10.Two CCs to GP FOR lRRt AND COMM AREA DEV, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 1'1 . Two CCs to GP FOR SERVTCES-|, High Court for the State of Tetangana at Hyderabad [OUT] BSR

12.Two CD Copies $ HIGH COURT DATED:2810512025 t o o t o\. 1aE S l4 14: ( 2 { JUll 2925 l ( .\ t oFo P,1TCH EO -a- * COMMON ORDER WP.No.23394 of 2019 & WP.No.13595 and 23094 of 2020 ALLOWING ALL THE WRIT PETITIONS, WITHOUT COSTS GJc('4W