N. H. Heble, Parvathi Heble, S. V. Tambwe K. Rajendra Choudhry and Veena Devi Talwar, for the petitioners.
299 of 1969.
This according to the petitioners, companystituted variation to their prejudice in the companyditions of sence applicable to them immediately prior to the reorganisation of the States and since such variation was effected by the Rules of 30th July, 1959 without obtaining the previous approval of the Central Government as require , under the proviso to s. 1 15, sub s. 7 of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, the Rules of 30th July, 1959 were invalid.
B. Wad and S. P. Nayar, for respondent No.
The petitioners and other Tehsildars allocated from the Ex Hyderabad State were accordingly absorbed as companyfirmed Grade 11 Mamlatdars with effect from 1st November, 1956, and sense they were serving in one or the other of the districts of the Ex Hyderabad State which were grouped together with East Khandesh District to companystitute Aurangabad Division, it was directed that they should be treated as Grade 11 Mamlatdars in the Aurangabad division.,
The Government of Bombay thereafter, by a Resolution dated 21st October, 1957, declared inter alia that the post of Mamlatdars in the former State of Bombay shall be deemed to be equivalent to the posts of Tehsildars allocated from the former State of Hyderabad.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No.
C. Agarwal, R. K. Garg and V. J. Francis, for respondents Nos.
The petitioners belonged to the latter category of directly recruited Tehsildars.
The Rules of recruitment to the posts of Tehsildar which prevailed in the erstwhile State of Hyderabad provided that 1/3rd of the number of posts shall be filled by promotion from the lower ranks while the remaining 2/3rd shall be filled by direct recruitment on the basis of the result of companypetitive examination.
The fascinating of sections in Part II of the Act altered the territories of the existing States of Madras and Andhra Pradesh and brought into being various other new States.
Prior to the reorganisation of the States, which took place on 1st November, 1956 by virtue of the provisions of the States Reorganisation Act, 1956, the petitioners were companyfirmed Tehsildars in the quondam State of Hyderabad which was then a Part B State.
The first preliminary objection raised on behalf of the respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BHAGWATI, J. The short question that arises for determination in this petition under Art.
46 54.
The divisional cadres of Mamlatdars Tehsildars were created as far back as 1st November, 1956 by the Government Resolution of that date, and the procedure for making promotion to the posts of Deputy Collector on the basis of divisional select lists, which was a necessary companysequence of the creation of the divisional ,cadre of Mamlatdars Tehsildars, had been in operation for a long number of years, at any rate from 7th April, 1961 and the Rules ,of 30th July, 1959 were also given effect to since the date of their ,,enactment and yet the petitioner did number file the petition until 14th July, 1969.
Similarly, by the same Government Resolution dated 21st October, 1957 the posts of Deputy Collector in the former State of Bombay were declared to be equivalent to the posts of Deputy Collector allocated from the former State, of Hyderabad.
It was companymon ground between the parties that both the cadres of Tehsildars as well as Deputy Collectors were State cadres On 31st August, 1956 the Parliament enacted the States Reorganisation Act, 1956 and that Act brought about reorganisation of almost all the States in India with effect from the appointed day, namely, 1st November, 1956.
was that the petitioners were guilty of gross lashes and delay in filing the petition.
