A.P.S.R.T.C. & ORS. v. B. Bodan Reddy (Dead) by LRs. & ORS.

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court
Hon'ble Judges: S.B. Sinha
Markandey Katju
Judgment Date: 2007-01-17
Court Decision / Holding: The impugned judgment is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
Final Disposition: Appeal allowed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

A.P.S.R.T.C. & ORS.

Respondents

Bodan Reddy (Dead) by LRs. & ORS.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• R. Santhan Krishnan
• K. Radha Rani
• Praveen K. Pandey
• P. Vijay Kumar
• G. Ramakrishna Prasad

Case Synopsis & Summary

This case concerns seniority and promotion within the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (A.P.S.R.T.C.). The Corporation divided its cadre into regional divisions, notably Warangal and Karimnagar. Employees opted for Warangal and were absorbed there, while posts later created in Karimnagar led to a junior employee from Karimnagar (T.J. Reddy) being promoted as Security Head Guard, based on regional seniority. The respondents, security guards stationed in Warangal, sought promotion and challenged the promotion of the Karimnagar junior. The Andhra Pradesh High Court directed the Corporation to consider the respondents for promotion from the date the junior had been promoted. The Supreme Court, however, held that the bifurcation created a new division and that cadre is maintained region-wise; thus, separate seniority lists must be maintained. If the respondents stayed in the Warangal region, there was no doctrine allowing promotion based on a merged seniority list, since vacancies in Karimnagar were filled from Karimnagar employees. The High Court’s approach to grant promotion on the basis of combined seniority was erroneous. The Court set aside the impugned judgment and allowed the appeal, clarifying that a new seniority list emerges following a valid regional division and promotions must align with that structure.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellant-Corporation contends that Warangal and Karimnagar constitute a bifurcated division forming separate divisions with region-wise cadres, requiring separate seniority lists. Since there has been a valid division creating a new Warangal region, seniority must be maintained on a regional basis, and promotion cannot be granted on the basis of a combined, pre-division seniority. Therefore respondents cannot claim promotion from the date their junior was promoted; the High Court's direction to consider their cases is erroneous and must be set aside.

Contentions of Respondents

Respondents contend that vacancies arising in Karimnagar and the fact that their junior achieved a promotion should not bar their own eligibility; however, the promotion from combined seniority would be improper only if the cadre were not region-based. They sought consideration for promotion from the date their junior was promoted.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

A B c D E F A.P.S.R.T.C. & ORS. _v._ B. BO DAN REDDY (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS. JANUARY 17, 2007 [S.B. SINHA AND MARKANDEY KAT JU, JJ.] ## _Service Law:_ > _Seniority-Division of corporation il"to different regions-Promotion in one region-Employees in other region not entitled to promotion by claiming seniority in combined list._ The respondents were appointed by the appellant-Corporation as Security guards at Warangal. The Corporation created different regions 'Karimnagar' and 'Warangal' Region for managing its affairs. When an option was called for in regard to their posting in the Warangal region and Karimnagar region, respondents opted for the former region. They were, therefore, absorbed in the Warangal region of appellant-Corporation. Subsequently some posts were created in the Karimnagar region. One 'T' who was junior to the respondents in the combined seniority list was promoted to the post of Security Head Guard as he became the senior most in the Karimnagar region. Respondent filed writ petition for consideration of their case for promotion. By reason of the impugned judgment, the writ petition was allowed d.irecting the appellant-Corporation to consider the eases of the respondents for promotion from the post of Security Guard to Security Head Guard from the date on which their junior had been promoted. Hence the present appeal. -1 r _,.:'_....._ ## Allowing the appeal, the Court G H HELD: The bifurcation of the rlivision is not in dispute. Warangal division, thus, became a new division. It has also not been disputed that cadre of the employees is maintained region-wise. Therefore, separate seniority lists were required to be maintained only on that basis. Once there has been a valid division of two regions as a result of which a new region came into being, a distinct and separate seniority list of the employees was required to be maintained. If the respondents had opted for 1102 _:_ 1103 --. / 1 """ ~. ## A.P.S.R.T.C. _v._ B. BODAN REDDY [SINHA, J.] remaining in the cadre of the employees of the Warangal region, only because a vacancy had fallen in the Karimnagar region and the same had been filled up from amongst the employees thereof, no exception thereto could be taken. The High Court did not consider this aspect of the matter and proceeded on the basis that as the respondents might be otherwise qualified, they were entitled to be considered for promotion opining that the respondents are and should not be deprived from being considered therefor when their juniors have been promoted. The High Court committed a manifest error in coming to the aforementioned conclusion inasmuch as there having been a valid division of the cadre, the question of the respondents becoming senior to the said 'T' in the Karimnagar Region did not and could not arise as a new seniority list came into being. (Para 4] [1104-C-F] A B C CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 6449 of2000 From the Final Judgment and Order dated 22.6.2000 of the Hig9 Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in W.P. No. 27767/1995 R. Santhan Krishnan, K. Radha Rani, Praveen K. Pandey, P. Vijay Kumar and G. Ramakrishna Prasad for the Appellants. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.B. SINHA, J. : 1. The Respondents herein were appointed by the appellant-Corporation as Security Guards. Different regions have been created by the Corporation for managing its affairs. The divisions of Karimnagar, Nizamabad, Warangal and Khammam formed part of one region known as 'Karimnagar Region ofKakatiya' in the appellant-Corporation. The Warangal region, however, was carved out therefrom known as 'Warangal Region'. The respondents herein had been working at Warangal. When an option was called for in regard to their posting in the Warangal region and Karimnagar region, they opted for the former region. They were, therefore, absorbed in the Warangal region of the appellant-Corporation. E F G 2. It is stated that subsequently some posts were created in the Karimnagar region. One Mr. T.J. Reddy, who was junior to the respondents in the combined seniority list was promoted to the post of Security Head Guard as he became the senior most in the Karimnagar region. H .. [2007] l S.C.R 1104 ## SUPREME COURT REPORTS A 3. A writ petition was filed by the respondents herein for consideration of their cases for promotion. An interim order was passed by the learned Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court ,directing the appellantCorporation to consider their cases. Aggrieved thereby, an appeal was preferred before the Division Bench. The Division Bench, however, although initially suspended the operation of the said interim order passed by the B learned Single Judge, thought it fit and expedient to withdraw the writ petition itself before it and determine the same on its own merits. By reason of the impugned judgment, the writ petition had been allowed directing the appellant-Corporation to consider the cases of the respondents for pr(jmotion from the post of Security Guard to Security Head Guard from the date on . c[which their junior had been promoted . ] 4. The bifurcation of the division is not in dispute. Warangal division, thus, became a new division. It has also not been disputed that cadre of the employees is maintained region-wise. Therefore, separate seniority lists were required to be maintained only on that basis. Once there has been a valid division of two regions as a result of which a new region came into being, a distinct and separate seniority list of the employees was required to be maintained. If the respondents had opted for remaining in the cadre of the employees of the Wararig~l region, in our opinion, only because a vacancy had fallen in the Karimnagar region and the same had been filled up from amongst the employees thereof: no exception thereto could be taken. The Division Bench of the ij'igh Court, in our opinion, did not consider this aspect of the matter. T~e Division Bench proceeded on the basis that as the respondents might be otherwise qualified, they were entitled to be considered for promotion opining that respondents are and should not be deprived from being considered therefor when their juniors have been promoted. In our opinion, the Division Bench committed a manifest error in coming to the aforementioned conclusion inasmuch as there having been a valid division of the cadre, the question of the respondents becoming seriibr to the said Mr. T.J. Reddy in the Karimnagar Region did not and could not arise as a new seniority list came into being. D E F G 5. The impugned judgment, for the reason aforemention~d, is set aside and the appeal is allowed. As none appears for the respondents, there shall be no order as to costs. -<. _·<-_ '1 _'(_ ""-"\ _J.,_ D.G. Appeal allowed.