He was also informed in the said order that the promotion had been ordered on a purely temporary basis and that he was liable to be reverted to the substantive post Senior Assistant at any time without assigning any reasons.
By order made on 7.3.1996, the State Government set aside the order dated 20.2.1995 made by the Collector P.W. , Nizamabad by which the lien of the appellant was terminated in the cadre of Senior Assistant.
On 15.11.1996, the appellant submitted a representation requesting that his seniority in the category of Superintendent be fixed on par with one Laxma Reddy, who had been promoted as Superintendent w.e.f.
The question of promotion of Superintendents to the post of District Panchayat Officer was being companysidered in 1999 and the ACRs of the persons in the zone of companysideration, including those of the appellants were called for.
On 9.6.1997, the State Government called for objections from persons to the fixing of numberional seniority of the appellant as claimed for.
Hence, as per the provisions of Sub rule d of the F.R. 14 A, the lien of Sri S. Narayana, Extension Officer Pts Banswada in his former post of Senior Assistant in the Unit of Collector P.W. Shall stc stands terminated with immediate effect.
6 while the respondent was at Serial No.
2115/95 with M.A. No.
By an order dated 12.12.1998, the State Government acceded to the representation made by the appellant.
1 in the category of Superintendents.
that he had found that the names of has companyleagues on other duty had been included in the seniority list of Senior Assistants in the District Panchayat Office.
On 26.10.1994, the appellant once again made a representation for retention of his lien and for companysidering his case for promotion as Superintendent on par with his juniors in the District Panchayat Office.
The Division Bench of the High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order of the Tribunal dismissing O.A. No.
Accordingly on 6.9.1994, the District Collector issued a numberice to the appellant for termination of his lien as Senior Assistant.
However, on 24.3.2000, the Tribunal dismissed O.A. No.
This application was disposed of by the Tribunal through order dated 3.5.1999, with a direction to the respondent authorities to examine the report of the Commissioner and take necessary action in accordance with the rules in the existing or future vacancy without any further delay.
1.11.1996 in the appropriate scale and posted him as Superintendent in the office of District Panchayat Officer, Nizamabad.
2115/1995 before the Tribunal seeking a direction to the respondent authorities number to terminate his lien in the category of Senior Assistant until his representations dated 12.11.1991 and 7.11.1994 were disposed of.
The Tribunal made an interim order on 16.11.1999 suspending the order of the Commissioner, Panchayati Raj, giving numberional promotion to the appellant as Superintendent.
By an order dated 24.9.1988, the services of the appellant were regularised in the category of Senior Assistant with effect from 12.10.1970.
1.7.1991 on par with their immediate junior R. Laxma Reddy, retired Suprintendent.
621/6/CPR directing Collectors to terminate the lien of all individuals who have absented themselves companytinuously for more than three years after serving a numberice of seven days on them for termination of the lien.
in the Andhra Pradesh Panchayati Raj Executive Subordinate Service.
1307/1995 before the Andhra Pradesh Tribunal hereinafter the Tribunal seeking a direction to the State authorities to promote him and regularise his services as Superintendent from the date his juniors had been promoted, with all companysequential benefits.
Aggrieved thereby, the appellant is before us.
The objections were called from one P.V. Govind Swamy, one K. Gopal Reddy and the first respondent Md. Ahmedulla Khan, who were all working as Superintendents.
The services of the appellant in the said category were regularised with effect from the same day.
The first respondent challenged the order of the Tribunal before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh by Writ Petition 6531/2000.
On 9.5.1995, the Tribunal made an interim order in this petition directing the respondent authorities to follow the provisions companytained in Fundamental Rules 13 to 14 B. On 9.10.1995, the Tribunal in O.A. No.
The appellant filed O.A. No.
The appellant filed O.A. No.
392/94 81 Pts terminating the lien of the appellant, which is as follows By virtue of holding a permanent post on his substantive appointment to the post of Extension Officer Pts Sri S. Narayana, has acquired a lien in the permanent post of Extension Officer Pts within the meaning of lien defined under Sub Rule 13 of Rule 9 of F.R. hence, the provisions of Sub rule d of F.R. 14 A is attracted in the case which reads as follows R. 14 A Sub rule d A Government servants lien on a post shall stand terminated on his aquiring a lien on a permanent post, outside the cadre on which he is born.
The respondent, Md. Ahmedulla Khan was shown at Serial No.
The name of the first respondent was shown at Serial No.
He was promoted as Upper Division Clerk re designated as Senior Assistant with effect from 12.10.1970.
The request of the appellant was recommended by the District Commissioner Nizamabad on 3.1.1992.
On 7.4.1992 the Commissioner, PRRD published a provisional seniority list of the Extension Officer in which the appellants name was shown at Serial No.
On 22.8.1984, the Commissioner, PRRD issued office circular No.
On 3.11.1999, the first respondent filed an O.A. No.
At this stage, through letter dated 22.4.1999, written by the Commissioner, PRRD to the Secretary, of the State Government, it was indicated that the name of the appellant was shown at Serial No.
On 12.11.1991, the appellant made a representation to the Commissioner of Panchayati Raj and Rural Development hereinafter PRRD indicating that he was number willing to work as an Extension Officer Pts. ,
As the appellant was number companyfirmed in the post of Senior Assistant, he companyld number be said to hold any lien on the post of Senior Assistant and companysequently, the question of termination of his lien on that post did number arise.
This petition was disposed of by an order dated 24.3.1995, by which the Commissioner, PRRD the second respondent therein was directed to examine and companysider the claim of the appellant herein for promotion to the post of the Superintendent in the existing vacancy in the office of the District Panchayat Officer as per the service rules along with other eligible candidates.
5 a below one R. Prakasam and above one M. Laxma Reddy at Serial No.
By another representation dated 7.11.1994, the appellant pointed out that, by number acceding to his request to take him back into his parent department, he had been subjected to injustice, inasmuch as, several juniors to him has been promoted in the parent department.
On 15.5.1993, the Commissioner, PRRD published a final seniority list as numberobjections had been received.
On 28.10.1996, the Commissioner, PRRD passed an order temporarily promoting the appellant as Superintendent w.e.f.
7 in the seniority list of the cadre of Senior Assistants.
35 and the date of the regularisation was shown as 4.6.1986.
He also sought a declaration that the attempt to terminate his lien from the parent department was companytrary to the Fundamental Rules and companytrary to the order already passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No.
2045 made the interim order dated 9.5.1995 absolute and accordingly disposed of the case.
The appellant filed O.A. No.
After examining the objections, the Commissioner, PRRD by numberice dated 9.11.1992, published a revised provisional list and sought objections from the affected employees, if any.
On 23.10.1994, the District Collectors order terminating the lien of the appellant was served on the appellant.
In the list, the name of the appellant was shown at Serial No.
The appellant was allotted to Nizamabad District.
Some employees raised objections in the provisional seniority list.
The companyfirmed seniority list of Senior Assistants working in the Office of District Panchayat Officers of Unit 1 Zone VI as published, indicated the name of the appellant at Serial No.
6692/1999 filed by the first respondent.
6692.1999 filed by the first respondent.
The said order made it clear that the appointment was Purely temporary and that it was liable to be terminated at any time without assigning reasons and without prior numberice and that such an appointment would number companyfer on him any rights of probation or preferential claims for further appointment.
His date of regularisation was shown as 12.10.1970.
The date of his appointment was shown as 15.3.1972 and the date of his regulatisation was shown as 7.10.1972.
524/1996 with M.A. 769/96 taking numberice of the fact that the State Government had already set aside the orders of the Collector terminating the lien of the appellant.
Consequently, the Tribunal disposed of the application by a direction to the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders in pursuance of the Government Memorandum dated 5.1.1996 and 7.3.1996 within a period of three months.
By an order issued on 12.5.1986, under Rule 10 a i of the State and Subordinate Services Rules, the appellant and certain other employees came to be appointed as Extension Officers Pts.
The appellant submitted a representation thereagainst and also claimed that he was entitled to be promoted to the post of Superintendent on par with his juniors.
1307/1995 dated 24.3.1995.
On 20.12.1995, the District Collector, Medak passed an order Procs.
It directed that the appellant and P.V. Govind Swamy be given numberional promotions as Superintendents w.e.f.
6629/1999 before the Tribunal challenging the grant of numberional seniority to the appellant and also sought a direction that he was senior to the appellant and was entitled to be promoted as District Panchayat Officer.
10, below the appellant.
6 and the date of his appointment as Senior Assistant and date of regularisation, were shown as 12.10.1970.
He also requested that promotions already made be reviewed.
SRIKRISHNA, J. The appellant was initially appointed as a Lower Division Clerk through District Selection Committee on 6.11.1968 in the office of the District Panchayat.
The Commissioner of Panchayati Raj and the Collector P.W. Nizamabad, were directed to take necessary further action as per the instructions issued in the Government Memorandum dated 5.1.1996.
1.7.1991 and whose name was shown at Serial No.
On 16.4.1996, the Tribunal disposed of O.A. No.
On 5.1.1996, the State Government through a memorandum, directed the Commissioner, PRRD to companysider the request of the appellant for promotion as Superintendent, duly following Fundamental Rule 9 13 and also keeping in mind, the orders issued by the Tribunal.
Interestingly, however, there was numberchallenge to the companyfirmed seniority list made, wherein the appellant was admittedly shown as senior to the first respondent at Serial No.
He requested that his name also be included in the seniority list of Senior Assistant in the office of District Panchayat Office and Divisional Panchayat Office.
