The High Court · 2026

Heard Sri P.V.Krishnaiah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-Ill appearing on behalf of respondents. 2,P YER The Petition r aooroached this Court seekino the praver as under : "...to grant appropriate relief, more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, declaring Memo No.A1/826/2003, dated 16.02.2022 issued by the 1't respondent as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory, non-application of mind, malafide and unconstitutional violating Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and set aside the same and issue consequential directions directing the Respondents to forthwith absorb the petitioner as Hostel Welfare Officer, Grade-I with eFfect from 19.05.2006 instead of 13.11.2015, and further direct the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotlon to the post of Hostel Welfare Officer, Grade-I, reckoning the servlces of the petitioner as Hostel Welfare Officer, Grade-II, with effect from 4 SN,] !v? No.14C61 20 23

19.05.2006 on par with the petitioner's unior with all consequential benefits including seniority, . r-ears of salary etc., and pass such other order..."

3. Case of the Petitio er in brief as oer l.l e averments made bv the Detitio ner in the affidavit 'iled bv the petitioner in suooort of the Dresent writ tion is as I under: The petitioner was appointed as a Ser:,ndary Grade Teacher in 2OO2 through D.S.C. 2001 and wa; subsequently transferred and posted as Hostel Welfare Officer (t.t W.O.) Grade- iI on 19.05.2006. After completing 15 years ,) service, the petitioner submitted several representations or 15.12.2008, 06,02.2010, and 11.02.2010 seeking absorption, regularization as H,W.O. Grade-II by transfer, in preference t( one Smt. l. Radha, who had joined the post without proper authorization. The 1't respondent, on 31.05.2010 sought clarifir; tion from the Government regarding the petitioner's request, bu t the petitioner was not informed of this action. Subsequently, the Hon'ble A.P. Administrati,r I Tribunal, by order dated 27.06.20t4 in O.A. No. 8577 of 2011 directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's case for tbsorption as H.W.O. Grade-II by way of promotion by trar sfer, as per 5 5N,J wP N0.14061 2023 G.O.Ms. No.20, Social Welfare (Sw.SER.1.3) Department, dated

28.02.2004, based on petitioner's seniorlty'and eligibility under the 10% quota earmarked for teachers. However, the 1't respondent, vide Memo No. A11826/2003 dated 16.02.2022, rejected the petitioner's request to consider petitioner's service in the Social Welfare Department t.e Scheduled Caste Development Department from 19.05.2006 instead of 13.11.2015. Aggrieved by the said memo, the present Writ Petition has been filed. 4 PERUSED T E RECORD: t (A) 0rder imouonedda ed 16.O2.2022 vide Memo No.A1l426/2OO3 oassed bv the 1"t resDondent is extracted ereunder: " With reference to your application 1't and 3'd cited it is to inform that, though you have worked as Hostel Welfare Officer Gr.II in Social Welfare .Department w.e.f., 19.05.2006 to 09.04.2011, your services were repatriated to the parent department i.e., Education Department in terms of the clarification issued by the Government with regard to absorption of Teachers working in SW Department on deputation basis. The Govt. have issued clarification that 1) Teachers on deputation beyond 3 years should be repatriated to parent department unless extended by the Government under special circumstances. 2) The Teachers on deputation cannot seek to be absorbed as a matter of right. ( 6 -{ SN,] WP No.14C61 202 3 Further you have relieved from SW t) )partment and joined in the parent department i.e., Educat i )n Department on 09.04.2011. Later, after working more tr rn (4) years in Education Department, again came to SW )epartment on deputation basis. Hence the services for ll e period from 09.04.2011 to 12.11.2015 cannot be treatr: las worked in SW Department. Further as per Memo No. 4236/SW/:) SW (S8R.1.1)Dept., Dated: 27.06.2008 at transfer the teachers should take the last rar existing HWOs Grade-II working in the Distri, In view of the above, your considering the services in Soc Department w.e.f., 19.O5.2006 instead ( is not acceptable. Accordingly your rG considered and rejected. iR.r.1/2007 -2, para 4(B) "on k amongst the t". request for al Welfare f 13.11.2015 quest as not (This has got approval of the Di:;, rict Collector, Nalqonda ) for District Cc lector (SCDD) Na gonda" (B) The relevant portion at Dara '5', _ rf the order dated 27.O6.20!4 oassed in O.A.No.8577 ol _ 2O11 on the file of Andhra Pradesh Ad in istrative _ Tribunal at I Hvderaba d, is extracted hereunder: "5. In view of the submission made tr' counsel for the applicant for unofficial respo^ having regard to the facts and circumstance the OA is disposed of directing the responderr the case of the applicant for absorption as Officer Grade-II by way of . promotion l accordance with the provisions in G.O.M:; Welfare (SW.SER.1.3) Department, dated . per her seniority and eligibility in the quota for teachers. " the learned lent No.7 and ; of the case, ts to consider lostel Welfare / transfer in No.20, Social 8.02.2004 as rf 1OYo meant 7 WP No.1406 5N,l 23 (c) The releva nt Dortion at oara '6' of the order 3 -1,2.202L inW No.367 extracted hereunder: "06. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Writ Petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation dated 10.08.2021 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. " 5 The learned counsel aooearinq on behalf of the oetitioner mainl v Duts forth the followinq submissions: (i) The order impugned dated 16.02.2022 is not sustainable in view of the fact that the order impugned had been passed referring to clarification issued by the Government that Teachers on deputation beyond 3 years should be repatriated to parent department unless extended by the Government under special circumstances and the Teachers on deputation cannot seek to be absorbed as a matter of right. The said internal clarification and internal correspondence which is not even a Government Order or a Government Memo cannot be the ground for rejecting the petitioner's request since the said clarification is internal correspondence and has no legal forge. SN,J WP No.14061 2023 (ii) The 1't respondent cannot igno- ) the services rendered by the petitioner in the Social Welfare ll lpartment since the respondents themserves aIowed the petitior t r to continue in Social Welfare Department beyond 3 years i.e., f om 19.05.2006 to 13.11.2015 i.e.,9 years instead of 3 years and since the petitioner continued in Social Welfare Departr tent beyond 3 years because of special reasons and further sin( 3 the petitioner was posted in Social Welfare Department or deputation on 19.05.2006 the clarification and guidelines issu: J in the Memo dated 16.03.2011, which stipulate that th: teachers on deputation cannot seek to be absorbed as a ma: er of right and teachers on deputation for more than 3 yt: rrs should be repatriated to the parent department unless ex:ended by the Government under special circumstances and ttr rsame cannot be the basis for rejecting the request of the petil.i )ner, since the clarification issued vide Memo of the 4th Rel; ron(s6g 661.6

16.03.2011 as indicated in the order impugned de tzd t6.02.2022 is a Memo issued only with prospective effect rnd the same cannot have a rerospective effect and the s: d clarification issued vide Memo dated 16.03.2011 as refrect€r( in the order impugned dated 16.02.2022 issued by the 1.t .espondent is 9 SN,] wP No.14061 2023 therefore illegal, discriminatory and malafide and hence liable to be set aside. (iii) The petitioner had already been absorbed with effect lrom 2015 and therefore the plea that Teachers on deputation cannot seek to be absorbed as a matter of right is totally illogical and unreasonable (iv) The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner shouid be absorbed from 19.05.2006 instead of 13.11.2015 in as much as since petitioner admittedly worked during that period as Hostel Welfare Officer, Grade-II and therefore the reasons in the order impugned dated 16.02.2022 -passed by the 1't respondent are not at all relevant since the said guidelines are nat applicable to the petitioner, in any manner. Based on the aforesaid su bmissions learned counsel anrte ann rlat n hc h Alf of rh nalilinn er eantandc e f h writ Detation has to be allowed as oraye[ior.

6. Learned Government Plea er aooearino on behalf of the 2nd resoondent otacinq reliance on the averments made in the Counter affidavi in oarticular, Daras 9 and 12 mainlv Duts forth the followino submissions : 10 sN.l !VP No.14C61 2023 (i) In the order issued to the petitioner n response to petitioner's request to absorb the petitioner ser\, :es on regular basis in terms of G.O.Ms.No.20 SW (Ser.I.3) Def artment dated

28.02.2004 it was clearly mentioned that the p:.itioner has to take the last rank in the SC Development I epartment as Grade.II HWO and accordingly orders wer(l issued vide proceedings dated ?2.02.2018 absorbing the petililner's services as Hostel Welfare Officer in Grade-Ii, Social Welf,t e Department on regular basis with efFect from 13.11.2015. (ii) The petitioner availed the bener'i oF Special Promotion Post Scale-IA in SGT Cadre in Educatir n Department and that the petitioner on one side claimed 12 1,,3p5 service in Education Department as SGT and also received th : benefit of an increment and the - petitioner cannot now seel.. the relief as sought for in the present writ petition. (iii) The petitioner had submitted an . pplication on

16.17.202L stating that the petitioner joined as H\\ C Grade-II on

13.11.2015 and completed 6 years of service an( requested to sanction her Special Grade Post scale in HWO Grari l-II cadre and orders were issued sanctioning Special Grade I ost scale for petitioner on completion of 6 years of service in r;rade-Il HWO 11 SN,.] wP No.14061 2023 cadre and fixed her pay accordingly vide proceedings Rc.No.A1/29l2018 dated 03.03.2022 and having repatriated to the parent department and worked in the Education Department. Petitioner again on deputation went to the Soclal Welfare Department from 13.11.2015 and availed the benefit of special grade post scale for completing 6 years in HWO cadre in Social Welfare Department and got fixed her pay accordingly and having taken last pay certificate in social welfare department, the request of the petitioner for absorption as HWO Grade-II at this juncture would not arise. (iv) There is no scope to provide deputation to the petitioner and therefore the request of the petitioner to provide deputation by transfer from Education Department is not feasible, since the petitioner's parent department is the Education Department, the petitioner has to go back to the Education Department, since the services of the petitioner were repatriated to the parent department, the question of considering absorption would not a rise. Based o the aforesaid submissions. the lea rned Governmen t Pleader contended tha the Detitioner is not 72 sN'l wP No.14061 202 3 entitled for anv relief as praved for in the!_ present writ petition. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION:

7. It is the specific case of the petitioner tha: petitioner was initially appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in the year 2002 and thereafter the petitioner was transferred ; nd posted as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-II on 19.05.2006 ar( the petitioner had completed 15 years of service in that ca: -e, hence the petltioner requested the respondents to absorb t'r I petitioner as Hostel Welfare Officer with effect from 19.05 . 006. But the respondents however had absorbed the petitio-:r rryith effect from 13.11.2015 and in the said set of circunstances, the peiitloner submitted a detailed representation to 1l e respondents on 10.08.2021 and when there was no actior on the said representation, the petitioner approached this CoJ -t by filing the writ petition No.36714 of 2021 and this Court (i sposed .of the said writ petition vide order dated 30.12.202 : directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 10.08.2021 submitted by the petitio r :r and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight (08) 'a eeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 73 SN,J wP No.14061 2023 It is further the case of the petitioner that on an earlier occasion the petitioner approached the A,p. Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad by filing O.A.No.8577 of 2011 and the said C.A.No.B577 of 2011 was disposed oF in favour of the petitioner directing the respondents thereunder to consider the case of the petitioner for absorptlon as Hostel Welfare Officer, Grade-II by way of promotion for transfer, in accordance with the provisions in G.O.Ms.No.20, Social Welfare (SW.SER.I.3) Department dated 28.02.2004 as per petitioner's seniority and eligibility in the quota of 10olo m€ont for teachers. In compliance to the directions of this Court dated 30.72.202L passed in W.p.No.36714 of 202L, the order impugned dated 16.02.2022 had been passed by the District Collector (SCDD), Nalagonda vide Memo No.A11826/2003 rejecting the request of the petitioner for considering the services cf the petitioner in the Social Welfare Department with effect from 19.05.2006 to 13.11.2015 without application of mind, without any justification, hastily and irrationally. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present writ petition. 74 SN,] v,,P N0.14061 2023

8. A bare perusal of the record indicates hat while the petitioner was working as a Secondary Grad( Teacher, the petitioner was transferred and posted as Hostel Velfare Officer, Grade-II on deputation vide proceedings dated t ).05 2006' The Andhra Pradesh Social Welfare Subordinate I ervtces Rules, issued vide G.O.Ms.No.1B9, Social Welfare (p: ) Department, dated 31.72.7997 and the relevant Rule ( I ' is extracted hereunder: "(3) METHOD OF APPOINTMENT AND APPINTII''L ;AU TH ORITY: Class and Category Method of appointmcrlt (1) (2) Appointing Authority (3)

3. (a) Warden, Grade-I By promotion of Wa rd e. Collector (b) Matron, Grade-I

4. Warden, Grade II Grade-II By promotion of Matro t r, Grade-II (I) By Direct recruitme I (ii) By promotion from t e Category of Class- I I Employees of Socia I Welfare Hostels. (iii) By transfer from arl other Collector Department/Servic €

9. A bare perusal of the said rule indicates hat the post of Warden Grade-II/Matron Grade-II i.e., Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-II shall be filled up by direct recruitme I , by promotion from the category of Class-lV employees o' Social Welfare 15 sN,l WP No.14061 2023 Hostels, transfer from any other Department/Service. In view of the fact that the above said rules clearly provide and promote an appointment by transfer from any other department/service and in view of the fact that the petitioner possesses the required qualification and since the appointment order of the petitioner indicates as appointment by transfer on deputation by proceedings dated 12.05.2006, this Court opines that the petitioner should be treated as a regular appointee and the petitioner should be allowed to continue as Warden Grade-II without repatriation to the parent department.

10. This Court also takes note of the fact that the initial appointment of the petitioner is in the year 2006 and second appointment is in the year 2015 and the services rendered by the petitioner for a period of 9 years between 2OO6 to 2015 had not been taken into consideration by the respondents for all purposes, though the petitioner is entitled for appointment as Hostel Welfare Officer as per Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Social Welfare Subordinate Services Rules referred to and extracted above, the petitioner however had been relieved from the post of Hostel Welfare Officer, and the respondents cannot deny the regularization of services of the petitioner from the 76 SN,] WP No.14061.,2023 date of initial appointment without :aking into consideration the orders obtained in far our of the petitioner by the Tribunal vide Judgment date:r l27.06.2014 passed in O.A.No.8577 ol 2011, hence, this )ourt opines that the order impugned had been passed nechanically without application of mind. 1 1. A bare perusal of the order impr.r trned dated L6.O2.2O22 clearly indicates that the clarific rtion issued by the Government vide Memo dated 16.03. 2 111 and the guidelines thereunder had been the basis for- denying the petitioner's request for appointing the petitior II HWO in terms of G.O.Ms.No.20. This Couli the guidelines which have no tegal force ;r internal correspondence and instructions wl er as Grade- opines that rd are only ich are not even a governmeit order issued under articl ) 162 of the Constitution cannot be the basis to reject th,e request for absorption from 19.05.2006 petitio ner's instead of

13.11.2015 since admittedly as borne on rec,c not disputed by the respondents herein, flr worked during the said period between 1t) 13.11.2015 as Hostel Welfare Officer Gr therefore the 1tt respondent is directed to rr:, rd and even = petitioner 05.2006 to rde-II and :onsider the 77 5N.l wP No.14061-2023 subject issue pertaining to absorption and regularization of services of the petitioner as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-II with effect from the date of posting the petitioner on deputation i.e., 19.O5.2006 since the authorities had already absorbed the petitioner in the Socia! Welfare Department/Scheduled Castes Development Department with effect from 13.11.2015, and since it is the specific grievance of the petitioner that the petitioner should be absorbed as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-Il with effect from 19.O5.2006 instead of

13.11.2015 and the same had not been considered at all in accordance to law duly taking into consideration the earlier orders obtained in favour of the petitioner dated

27.O6.2OL4 passed in O.A.No.8577 ol 2OlL and the order dated 30.12.2021 passed in W.P.No,367L4 ot 2O2l and the request of the petitioner had been rejected based on certain guidelines and clarification holding that the services of the petitioner for the period 09.04.2011 to

12.11.2015 cannot be treated as worked in Sociat Welfare this Court ooines that the su biect Department. Hence, rssue reouires recons ideration bv the 1"t res ondent th e herein since as H ostel W rade-I ffice rk reO ) I ...,1ii t8 SN,] \JP t,lo. r4361 2021 petitio worked durinq the Deriod 1. ).05.2006 to

13.11. 15 and the same is not in dispute. T2, TAKING INTO CONSIDERA TION: A) The aforesaid facts and circumst tnces of the case, B) The submissions made by the le;r .ned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner ancl the learned Government Pleader appearing on bel. alf of the respondents t C) The contents of the Order imp rgned dated L6.O2.2O22 passed by the l't respondent (rr: erred to and extracted above), D) The order dated 27.O6.2OL4 passed in O.A.No.8577 of 2O11(referred to and extract(: I above), E) The order dated 3O.12.2O2L passed in W.P.No.367L4 of 2O2L (referred to and extra,::ed above), The order impugned passed by the 1' respondent dated 16.02.2O22 is set aside and the 1.t r.cspondent is directed to reconsader the request of the 1::titioner for \f- 19 sN,l wP No.14061 2023 absorption as Hostet Welfare Officer, Grade-II, with effect from 19.05.2006 instead of 13.11.2015 and further reconsider the request of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Hostel Welfare Officer, Grade-I, reckoning the services of the petitioner as Hostel Welfare Officer, Grade- II, with effect from 19.05.2006 on pai with petitioner's juniors, within a period of four (O4) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order in accordance to law, in conformity with principles of natural justice, duly taking into consideration the earlier orders obtained in favour of the petitioner in O.A.No.8577 ot 2O11 and the order, dated 3O.L2.2O2L passed in W.P.No.367l4 ol 2021 and pass appropriate reasoned speaking oJder, and duly communicate the decision to the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. T.SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I 6 SECTION OFFICER One Fair Copy to the Hon'ble MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA (Foi His LadYshiPs kind Perusal) To, Affairs, New Delhi. 1 11 LR Cooies i. in,i'ri,io5i $cretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Law' Justice and company 3. The Secretary, Telangana Advocates Association' Library' High Court + if, lj"ri iitiiJt' b"ir Jtoi trw I Nalsonda District' Nal gond a' Buildinqs, HYderabad Nalgonda [,4asab Tank, Hvderabad

5. The Deputy Director, Scheduled Caste Devetopment r) )pt., Natgonda Drst., 6. The Director, Scheduled Caste Development Dept, Stl e of Telangana. 7 The Principal S6cretary to Govt. Scheduled Caste Devr lopment Dept, The ^ State_of Tetangana. Secretariat Aiag , Hyderab;;. "" Q 9n" 9Q to sRt p v KR|SHNAIAH,-Abr,jc"tJiSFucr 9 Two CCs to Gp FOR SERVTCES rit, nrgh CoJ;'foiir.it: jtate of Telangana 10. Two CD Copies PSK g BN I H!GH COURT DATED:3011012025 GC TODAY ) ) ORDER WP.No.14061 of 2023 I I 1t1E S ,4 ,lR 6 r[8 202fr :t !i * z P ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS c) o 4 b