The High Court · 2025

intheaffidavitfiledinsupportofthepetition,theHighCourtmaybepleasedto suspendtheorderpassedinW.P.No.2S6TOot2023datedl3/09/2024pending disposal of the writ aPpeal. Counsel for Appellant : SRI M'SURENDER RAO' SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI NARESH KUMAR GORIGE counsel for Respondent G.l a 2: sRl S'sATYANARAYANA RAo' GP FoR SERVICES - I Corn""f for Respondent No.3 : SRI M'SRIKANTH The Court made the following JUDGMENT r1 I I THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE} HON'BLE SMT. JUSTTCE RENUKA YARA WRIT APPEAL No. 1 184 of 2O24 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Pttul) Sri M.Surender Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Sri G.Naresh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Santhapur Satyanarayana Rao, learned Government Pleader for Services - I, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri M.Srikanth, learned counsr:l for respondent No.3.

2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ appeal is heard finally.

3. In this intra Court appeal, the challenge is mounted to the order of tbe 1earned Single Judge passed in W.P.No.2867O of 2023, dated ).:i.Og.2024. 4 . Before thLe writ court, the challenge was to the order dated

06.1O.2023, whereby respondent No.3 (writ petitioner), who was holding the prost of Additiona-l District Public Heatth Officer (ADPHO) at Medchal-Malkajgiri District was directed to get herself \ 2 relieved from the said post and to report before the Director of Public Health and Family Welfare, Telangana, Hyderabad, for further orders. The case of respondent No.3 before the learned Single Judge was that she came to have occupied the said post with effect from 12.09.2023 only. The appellalt, who was promoted arrd posted at Medchal-Malkajgiri District, could not have been permitted to act as a striker in the carrom board of the department for shifting respondent No.3.

5. The learned Single Judge, after considering the schedule which shows that the posts of District Medical and' Health Officer (DM&HO) and ADPHO are in the equivalent cadre, opined that the writ petition deserves to be allowed and therefore, the impugned order dated 06.L0.2023 was set aside to the extent of posting the appellant at Medchal-Malkajgiri District and respondent Nos.l and 2 were directed to continue respondent No.3 as ADPHO at Medhcal-Malkaj giri District.

6. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that both the posts are two different statutory posts. The statutory recruitment rules, namely the Andhra Pradesh Health and Family Welfare Services Rules, 2002, initially contained the category of ta. ) , 3 Civil Surgeon in categories from 3(a) to 3(e). The post of DM&HO falls in the category of 3(a). The same was subsequently substituted by inserting the category 3(f) by order dated

28.05.2016 and the said insertion included Additiona-l District Public Health Officers (ADPHOs). Thus, it is not correct to say that both the posts a_re sarne or equivalent or interchangeable. Much emphas,is is laid on G.O.Ms.No.t42, dated 22.O9.2O23, to bolster the submission that out of 38 posts of DM&HOs, 10 DM&HOs shall be ADPHOs. Thus, the result will be that there shall be 28 DM&HOs and 1O ADpHOs. The department has bifurcated it ir. the same way, which is evident fyom the perusal of Annexures II.lr and II.B. Thus, the foundationa_l finding of the learned Single Judge that both the posts were equivalent was factually incorrect.

7. The learned Government pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 hies supported the order of the learned Single Judge and submits ttLat in furtherance of the order passed by this court on 03.O2.2O25, respondent No.l has issued Ci.O.Rt.No.47, dated 07 .O2.2025, rvhereby writ petitioner/respondent No.3 was permitted to continue as ADpHo at Medchal-Malka.lgiri District / / - -:;;:;;-i;;-r- ;i ..- . 4 and the appellant was relieved by directing him to report before the Director of Public Health and Family Welfare, Telangana, Hyderabad, for further posting. He submits that the enclosure to G.O.Ms.No.142 dated 22-08-2023 (page No'72) shows that both the posts are interchangeable.

8. Learned counsel for respondent No'3 placed reliance on the Annexure to G.O.Ms.No.24, dated Oa.O2'2OI7, to show that there exists no posts of DM&HO in Medchal. g. In the rejoinder submissions, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant had taken charge from one Dr. Putla Srinivas, DCS, who was holding the post of In-charge DM&HO, whereas respondent No'3 was working as ADPHO at Medchal-Malkaj giri District' 10 We have heard the parties at length and perused the record'

11. The operative portion of the order of the learned Single Judge reads thus:- "8) That apart, while adopting The Andhra Pradesh Health' Medical & Family Welfare Service Rules, 2OO2, to the State of Telangana, vide G.O.Ms.No.37, Health, Medica'l and Family Welfare (B1) Department, dated 28.O5.2OL6, certain modifrcations *a \ 5 were made to the Rules. As per Rule 4 thereof, the qualihcations prescribed for the post of ADPHO are as under: "(it lv{BBS degree or an equivalent qualification as entered in the Schedule to the Indian Medical Council Act, 1!)56 as s ubsequently amended. (ii) Diploma in Public Health or M.D. Preventive Medicine) of a recognized Universitv (Social ald (iii) Ex.perience in the Public Health Field Sr:rvice of not less than 5 years after obtaining Diploma in Public Health or M.D. (Social and Preventive Medicine) qualification. Note: Preference shall be given to those with training in Epidemiolory in the National Institute of Communicable Diseases, or any other equivalent recognZed training." whereas the qualihcation prescribed for the post of Civil Surgeon is 'MBB.S 'Tegree or an equiualent quolification os entered. in the Schedule to the Indian Medicat Council Act, j956, as subsequentlA amended'. In view of the above, this Court is of the vieu, that the posts of DI\4 & HO and ADPHO are different and distinct. 9) Now, th,3 question remains before this Court is with regard to the vacant:y/vacancies of ADPHO/DM & HO availablr: in the Medchal- Malkajgiri District. 10) A perusal of the materia_l on record reveals that vide G.O.Ms.No 142, dated 22.Oa.2O23, the Government has sanctioned 5 Additiona_l DM & HO Offices in GHMC area in addition to the existing DM & HO. With the sanction of S new DM & HO offices, the State has 38 DM & HO O{fices. It is furt}rer clarihed, ;rt para 3 A (iv) thereof, that out of 38 DM & HOs, 10 DM & HOs shall be ADPHOs, which goes to show that both the cadres are equival:nt in nature. Further, as per Annexu re II-B appended to G.o.Ms_trto.142, dated 22.oa.2o23, one DM & Ho/ADt,Ho was sanctioned to Medchal-Malkajgiri District. Thus, there is a sanction of only one post to Medchal-Malkajgin. 6 r- 11) Further, as can be seen from G.O Ms.No 24, Finance (HRM-l) Department, dated O8.O2.2OI7 , consequent to formation/ reorganization of Districts, Revenue Divisions and Mandals in the State of Telangana, the Government has issued orders distributing the available cadre strength among the Districts' A perusal of the arrnexures appended to the said G.O. makes it abundantly clear that only one ADPHO post has been allocated to Medchal District and no District Medical & Heatth Officer post has been allotted to Medchal District. Therefore, this Court is of the view that when the petitioner is already working as ADPHO in Medchal-Malkajgiri not have Posted the third District, the resPondents ought the petitioner. Therefore, respondent in the Place of and FamilY Welfare '(B) G.O.Rt.No.584, Health, Medical Department, dated 04.10.2023, issued by respondent No'1 ald the proceedings in Rc.No.45 lO lEl-B 12023, dated 06'10'2023' issued by respondent No.2 are set aside to the extent of posting respondent No.3 at Medchal-Malkajgiri and the respondents are continue the petitioner as ADPHO at Medchal- directed to Mafkjgin. 12) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed'"

12. The order of the learned Single Judge appears to be based on the Annexure to the G'O'Ms'No'142, d'ated 22'Oa'2O23 ' A careful reading of the said document shows that the designation is shown as DM&HO/ADPHO and tn Medchal-Malkajgrri District only one post is shown- Thus, the order of the learned Single Judge is based on a plausible consideration of the document and , t ( L 7 the said findin.g cannot be said to be perverse. If the argument of the learned Senior Counsel for the appellalt is accepted that there existed two posts of ADPHO and DM&HO in Medhcal-Malkajgiri District, there was no occasion for the department to transfer/ shift :respondent No.3 upon promotion and posting of the appellant. Putting it differently, if both the posts a_re not interchangeable and are not the same, the posting of the appellant I t could not have resulted into shifting of respondent No.3. I I

13. In order to resolve the dispute, respondent No.l has now passed an orrler vide G.O.Rt.No.47 dated OT.O2.2O25 thereby intending to give appropriate posting to the appellant. A person on promotion can claim the right on a post ancl not on a place. In other words, upon promotion on a substantive post, the appellant can only claim lien on a post and not on a place. The department is best suited to resolve such kind of disputes and has resolved it by G.O.Rt.No.zl7, dated 07.O2.2O25. If the appellant is posted elsewhere on the promotion post, no prejudice will be caused to l4 In this backdrop, we find no reason to entertain this appeal 8 6

15. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. To Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, sha1l stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.T. KRISHNA KUMAR DEPUTY REGISTRAR s TION OFFICER I.TwoCCstoGPFoRSERVICES-l,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad. [OUT]

2. Oie CC to SRI NARESH KUMAR GORIGE' Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to SRI M.SRIKANTH, Advocate (OPUC) 4. Two CD Copies SA BS a,q: ==7=:'_- < STf.l ri 1 ,t- -l o ) 1E ttt, ?l?i .i t c'".i l--sr't,'C'\ --'; i'' '..-..-. n HIGH COURT DATED:1310212025 JUDGMENT WA.No.1184 of 2024 DISMISSING THE W.A WITHOUT COSTS. ,.' \a< *