Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
B. Mary Jalaja vs S. Vasantha Vani And Ors. on 16 October, 1995
Equivalent citations: 1996(1)ALT686
Author: T.N.C. Rangarajan
Bench: T.N.C. Rangarajan
JUDGMENT M.N. Rao, J.
1. At issue in this appeal is the seniority of the appellant Smt. B. Mary Jalaja and the first respondent Smt. Vasantha Vani in the post of Lecturer in Political Sciences in the Smt. Kandukuri Rajyalakshmi College for Women, Rajahmundry. The post of Lecturer in Political Science is the college is an aided one. Pursuant to a selection made by the competent authority, the appellant herein, Mrs. Mary Jalaja, and the first respondent Smt. Vasantha Vani were selected and the committe on a comparative assessment of their merit assigned rank No. 1 to the appellant and rank No. 2 to the first respondent. The last date for reporting for duty was 20-12-84. The first respondent joined service on 11-12-84 while the appellant joined service on 17-12-84. In September, 1992 one of the two posts became surplus because of change in the norms concerning working hours. Several other posts in other institutions also were found to be surplus because of the aforesaid change and therefore the Director of Higher Education by letter dt. 13-7-1988 requested the State Government to shift the Lecturers found to be surplus to different colleges as other wise they ran to risk of losing the jobs. Acceding to that request of the Director of Higher Education, Government issued orders in Memo No. 2/CE II-1/88-5, Edn., dated 21-12-1988 the relevant portion of which read as follows:
"(1) Surplus Teachers and uneconomic sections should be identified in Government & Private institutions on the basis of the increased workload yardstick fixed by Government(i.e. 20 Clock Hours as per G.O. cited).
(2) These surplus Teachers should be adjusted to the extent possible against existing vacancies. Surplus Teachers remaining unadjusted should be adjusted against future vacancies as and when they arise."
In consequence of the implementation of the aforesaid policy it was felt that as between the appellant and the first respondent, the appellant was junior and to the first respondent, accordingly she was transferred to Gudivada College. She made a representation to the Director of Collegiate Education on 12-10-92 which was allowed by the Director by his proceedings dt. 3-11-92 in R.C. No. 4348/FCI-3/92. The Director stated in the aforesaid proceedings:
"As seen from the minutes Smt. Mary Jalaja was placed in 1st place in order of merit. Therefore, she is senior to Smt. Vasantha Vani."
Consequently the Director held that the appellant herein should be re-transferred to Smt. K.R. College for Women, Rajahmundry, vice the first respondent transferred to K.T.R. Women's College, Gudivada.
2. Challenging the above proceedings of the Director of Collegiate Education W.P. No. 15500/92 was filed by the first respondent here in. A learned Single Judge of this court, J. Eswara Prasad, J. allowed the writ petition taking the view that the Andhra University while approving the appointments of the appellant and the first respondent had treated the first respondent as senior to the appellant and therefore the action of the Director of Collegiate Education in reversing the order of seniority was without jurisdiction. Aggrieved by that the present appeal was brought.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for both sides and also the learned Government Pleader, we are of the view that this appeal must succeed. The order of the Andhra University which was the basis for the learned Judge to allow the claim of the first respondent herein had nothing to do with the determination of seniority. The order dt. 27-2-85 was issued by the Registrar of the University to the Correspondent of Smt. K.R. College for Women, Rajahmundry "approving the appointments of the teachers in the college" and it mentioned the names of five teachers in the order in which they joined duty. This cannot be interpreted as an order determining the seniority of he persons named therein.
4. The legal position in this regard is well settled. When once a competent authority after considering the comparative merits of the applicants for a post has determined their ranks the same cannot be altered with reference to the dates of their joining. If any such alteration was to be made, it would be unconstitutional being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. In Chairman, Puri Grammya Bank and Anr. v. Ananda Chandra Das and Ors. (D.N.), it was held in a some what similar fact situation:
".. .On comparative evaluation of the respective merits of the candidates for direct recruitment, the Board had prepared the merit list on the basis of he ranking secured at the time of the selection. It is settled law that if more than one are selected, the seniority is an per ranking of the direct recruits subject to the adjustment of the candidates selected on applying the rule of reservation and the roster. By mere fortuitous chance of reporting to duty earlier would not alter the ranking given by the Selection Board and the arranged one as per roster. The High Court is, therefore, wholly wrong in its conclusion that the seniority shall be determined on the basis of the joining reports given by the candidates selected for appointment by direct recruitment and length of service on its basis."
5. Sri Venkata Rao, learned counsel for the first respondent, has urged that the seniority of the first respondent became final as the appellant herein had not challenged the same and therefore that should not be disturbed now. We are unable to agree. At no point of time the seniority as determined by the Selection Committee was altered either by the Management or by the University. Therefore the question of the first respondent herein treating herself as senior to the appellant did not arise.
6. For these reasons the writ appeal is allowed. The judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P.15500/92 is set aside and the writ petition is dismissed, but in the circumstances without costs. The impugned proceedings of the Director of Collegiate Education dt. 3-11-92 in the writ petition are sustained.
7. We make it clear that if the first respondent makes any representation the same may be considered by the Director of Collegiate Education for keeping her in the same place without disturbing the seniority and transferring the appellant herein from the S.K.R.College for Women, Rajahmundry.
8. At our request Sri Siva Ramakrishna, G.P. for School Education assisted us as Amiens Curiae. We place on record our high appreciation of the able assistance rendered by him.