Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
K.V. Ramana Rao vs Government Of Andhra Pradesh And Others on 7 June, 2000
Author: Elipe Dharma Rao
Bench: Elipe Dharma Rao
ORDER
1. This writ petition is filed to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings RC No.2478-B1/ 2000, dated 27-6-2000 issued by the 4th respondent Regional Joint Director of Intermediate Education, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District, directing the 5th respondent Secretary and Correspondent, SVLNS Vidyapeeth Junior College, Gopalpatnam,. Visakhapatnam, to appoint the 6th respondent M. Mohana Vankata Rao as In-charge Principal as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents 1 to 5 to fill up the post of Principal of SVLNS Vidyapeeth Junior College, Gopalpatnam, Visakhapatnam on regular basis pursuant to the proceedings of the Board of Intermediate Education, Hyderabad in RC No. 199/E1-1/98, dated 29-4-2000 and a pass such further and other orders, which are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The petitioner is a Post-Graduate from Andhra University and is working as Lecturer in Telugu and In-charge Principal of SVLNS Vidyapeeth Junior College, Gopalpatnam, Visakhapatnam. It is submitted that the petitioner 6th respondent along with ten others joined as Lecturers in different faculties in the 5th respondent College on 2-1-1981 and the said appointments were approved by the Chairman, Standing Committee on Academic Affairs, Board of Intermediate Education through their proceedings dated 16-4-1985.
3. It is further submitted that one K. Narayana Murthy, a senior most Lecturer in the College was appointed as Principal in the month of September, 1980 by the Management which was ratified by the Director of Intermediate Education and he retired from service in the month of October, 1994 on attaining the age of superannuation, but he was continued as such till the end of July, 1995 and thereafter, the 6th respondent was appointed as In-charge Principal, but during his tenure of six months, since the Management found deterioration in the discipline of College to the lowest level, he was removed and one R. Sitarama Swamy, a retired Regional Inspection Officer and one M. Subba Rao, retired Principal, were made as In-charge Principals. But the said Subba Rao left the College in the month of April, 1998 on his own. Thereafter, the 5th respondent through proceedings dated 29-4-1998 appointed the petitioner as In-charge Principal and he is working. After the appointment of the petitioner as In-charge Principal, the 5th respondent through their letter dated 24-7-1999 addressed to the Regional Inspection Officer, Board of Intermediate Education, Visakhapatnam, gave reasons for such appointment as he was the best Lecturer available to act as In-charge Principal. Meanwhile, the 5th respondent addressed a letter dated 10-6-1998 to the Director of Intermediate Education to accord permission to the Management to fill up the post by direct recruitment duly following the procedure and also through letter dated 29-4-2000 reminded the Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education to grant permission for filling up the post of Principal by way of direct recruitment. In response to the above letters, the 5th respondent through his proceedings dated 27-3-1999 directed the Management to apply for permission to fill up the vacant post of Principal as per procedure and rules contemplated in G.O. Ms. No. 127 Education (CE.II) Department dated 7-6-1993.
4. It is stated that on the basis of the representation made by the 6th respondent, the 4th respondent through his proceedings RC No.2478-B1/2000, dated 27-6-2000, in terms of Memo No. 6404/CE-II-1/98-1 Education, dated 17-4-1999, directed the 5lh respondent to appoint the 6th respondent on the basis of seniority. According to the petitioner, G.O. Ms. No. 127, dated 7-6-1993 contemplates the procedure for appointment of Principals from among the Junior Lecturers. It is further submitted that paragraph No.9 of the said GO contemplates that the posts of Principals of Junior Colleges shall be filled by recruitment by transfer from among qualified eligible and suitable junior Lecturers under the same Management and in the absence of such junior Lecturers by direct recruitment, therefore, as per the above condition, all the qualified eligible and suitable junior Lecturers are entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Principal, but the restriction of the zone of consideration to the first three senior most Lecturers as per the Memo dated 27-1-1995 issued by the first respondent have the overriding effect of the GO issued by the Government prescribing the mode of selection to the post of Principal in the Junior Colleges.
5. Questioning the above said impugned order of the 4th respondent, the present writ petition is filed.
6. Paragraph No.9 of the G.O. Ms. No.127 Education (CE.I) Department dated 7-6-1993 prescribes the mode of selection of the Principals of Junior Colleges viz., the post of Principals of Junior Colleges shall be filled by recruitment by transfer from among qualified eligible and suitable Junior Lecturers under the same Management and in the absence of such Junior Lecturers by direct recruitment. G.O. Ms. No. 127 was issued in amendment of G.O. Ms. No. 12 Education, dated 10-1-1992. The preamble of GO reads that the Selection Committee constituted in G.O. Ms. No. 119, dated 22-3-1991 in respect of each College shall also act as "Promotion Committee" for approval of panel of names for appointment by transfer as Principals of Degree Colleges from among the Lecturers, Readers from among the Lecturers in PG Courses, Lecturers from the category of junior Lecturers, Physical Directors from Assistant Physical Directors of Degree Colleges, Lecturers in Library Science in Degree Colleges from among the Assistant Librarians in Degree Colleges and Librarians in Junior Colleges working in the same College/Management.
7. Evidently, this GO is issued in the name of Governor of Andhra Pradesh whereas, the impugned memo was issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Education Department, on the basis of the representation of the Association of Affiliated Colleges, Teachers Association and Junior College Teachers Associations, wherein they raised an issue for filling up of the post of Principals in Private Aided Junior Colleges. They further requested the Government to issue clear instructions to the effect that only senior most Lecturer/ junior Lecturer may be kept in-charge whenever vacancy arises and also while considering the promotion for the post of Principals in Private Degree/Junior Colleges first three names may be considered. After due consideration of the above demand of the Association, the Principal Secretary to Government, has issued the Memo informing the Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education, that the procedure for selection prescribed in G.O. Ms. No. 158, Dated 10-6-1987; 119, dated 22-3-1991; 12 dated 10-1-1992 and 127, dated 7-6-1993 has to be followed for appointment of Principal by promotion from among the Lecturers/junior Lecturers in the Private Aided Colleges and the first three senior most Lecturers/Junior Lecturers only be considered for filling up of the post of Principal. It was further clarified that till such appointments are made, one of the three senior most Lecturers/Junior Lecturers kept in-charge of the vacant post of Principal.
8. Paragraph No.9 of G.O. Ms. No. 127 deals with two methods of appointment as Principals of Junior Colleges viz., firstly recruitment by transfer form among qualified eligible and suitable Junior Lecturers under the same Management and secondly in the absence of such Junior Lecturers by direct recruitment.
9. The posts of Principals of Degree Colleges, Law College, College of Education shall be filled by direct recruitment by transfer from among the eligible qualified and suitable Lecturers with ten years of service under the same Management and in the absence of such Lecturers by direct recruitment, but this condition often years experience is absent in the case of appointment of Principals to the Junior Colleges. But in the impugned Memo, the Principal Secretary to Government, Education Department, prescribed that the appointment of Principals shall be from among the Lecturers/Junior Lecturers in the Private Aided Colleges and the first three senior most Lecturers/Junior Lecturers only be considered for filling up the post of Principal and till such time if the Management wants, it can make one of the three senior most Lecturers/junior Lecturers as in-charge of the vacant post of Principal. Thus the Principal Secretary, Education Department, through the impugned memo has restricted the zone of consideration to three senior most Lecturers/junior Lecturers even to be made as In-charge Principal also. If the Government wants to restrict the zone of consideration for appointment as Principal in Junior Colleges among the three senior most Lecturers/junior Lecturers under the same Management, it should have incorporated the same in the GO by way of amendment to G.O. Ms. No.127 instead of issuing a memo by a Subordinate Authority to the Governor in the name of clarification, like one which is impugned in this writ petition. Undoubtedly memo cannot and does not have an overriding effect of the GO. When once the Government has prescribed qualifications and eligibility under G.O. Ms. No.127, the Principal Secretary to the Government has neither the power nor authority to prescribe additional qualifications, through the impugned memo without amending the GO issued by the Government. As the 4th respondent has requested the Director and Commissioner of Intermediate Education, through letter dated 10-6-1998 seeking permission to fill up the post of Principal by direct recruitment duly following the procedure and the Director and Commissioner of Intermediate Education, through proceedings dated 27-3-1999 directed the Management to apply for permission to fill up the vacant post of Principal as per procedure and rules in terms of G.O. Ms. No.127, dated 7-6-1993. Accordingly, on 27-5-1999 the 5th respondent addressed a letter to the Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education, requesting to accord permission to fill up the vacant post of Principal under direct recruitment and in turn, the Director of Intermediate Education through their proceedings dated 29-4-2000 directed the Management to initiate necessary action on regular basis. Therefore, when once request is made by the 5th respondent to allow him to fill the vacant post of Principal and the Director and Commissioner of Intermediate Education has directed to apply for permission to fill up the said post as per the procedure contemplated under G.O. Ms. No. 127, dated 7-6-1993, issuance of the impugned proceedings by the 4th respondent directing the 5th respondent to made the 6th respondent as In-charge Principal and to follow the procedure contemplated in the memo dated 27-1-1995 is contrary to the instructions issued by the 2nd respondent.
10. I have already held that the Memo No. 89/CE.III-1/95 Education, dated 27-1-1995 is illegal and issued without power by the Principal Secretary to the Government, inasmuch as it is contrary to the provisions of G.O. Ms. No.127, dated 7-6-1993. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the 4th respondent i.e., The Regional Joint Director of Intermediate Education, Rajahmundry dated 27-6-2000 requesting the 5th respondent to give charge to the 6th respondent Sri M. Mohana Venkata Rao of the post of In-charge Principal, if he is senior most Junior Lecturer with immediate effect is illegal and contrary to the provisions of G.O. Ms. No.127 and is liable to be set aside.
11. In view of the above conclusions arrived at by me, I need not go into the rival contentions of the petitioner and the 6th respondent and as to who is to be kept as in-charge of the post of Principal. Since I have already set aside the Memo No.89/CE.III-1/ 95 Education, dated 27-1-1995 as illegal and contrary to the provisions of G.O. Ms. No.127, therefore, the question of giving charge to the 6th respondent as Principal of SVLNS Vidyapeeth Junior College, Gopalpatnam, Visakhapatnam, does not arise for the reason that the 6th respondent was succeeded by two Principals viz., M/s. R. Sitarama Rao and M. Subba Rao and petitioner. In terms of the provisions of G.O. Ms. No.t27, the petitioner was selected by the Management since he being qualified, eligible and suitable among the Junior Lecturers, as In-charge Principal, therefore, he can hold the post until such post is filled up by the 5th respondent on regular basis.
12. In the interest of justice, the 5th respondent is further directed to take immediate steps to fill up the vacant post of Principal of SVLNS Vidyapeeth Junior College and send proposals to get permission from the Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the Commissioner and Director of intermediate Education in turn is directed to process the same and pass appropriate orders according to law within a period of four weeks thereafter. The respondents are directed to complete the entire exercise within a period of three months from today to avoid further inconvenience to the students and public next academic year.
13. It is needless to add that since the appointment of 5th respondent is upheld for the reason that it was made in accordance with the provisions of G.O. Ms. No.127 by the Management of SVLNS Vidyapeet Junior College, Gopalpatnam, Visakhapatnam, he shall continue to manage the affairs of the College in view of re-opening of the College for academic year 2001-2002.
14. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs.