Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Dr. G. Geetha Bai, Krishna Dist vs Prl Secy, Medical Health, Hyd 2 Others on 24 July, 2025
Author: B Krishna Mohan
Bench: B Krishna Mohan
1
APHC010181932011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3527]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA
WRIT PETITION NO: 10443/2011
Between:
1. DR. G. GEETHA BAI, KRISHNA DIST, W/O. I. RAVINDRA NATH
MEDICAL OFFICER / CIVIL ASSISTANT SURGEON PRIMARY
HEALTH CENTRE, BUCHAVARAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
AND
1. PRL SECY MEDICAL HEALTH HYD 2 OTHERS, MEDICAL AND
HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF A.P. SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD
2. THE DIRECTOR OF HEALTH, ANDHRA PRADESH, SULTAN
BAZAR, KOTI HYDERABAD
3. THE REGISTRAR APAT HYDERABAD, ANDHRA PRADESH,
SULTAN BAZAR, KOTI HYDERABAD
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be
pleased toIssue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the
nature of writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the orders dt.
18.2.2010 in OA.No. 4910/2007 on the file of Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh
Adminstrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in rejecting the claim of the applicant for
promotion to the post of Deputy Civil Surgeon on the ground tht the calim of
2
the applicant for seniority from the date of oringinal appointment on the
basis of Rule 33 of A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules has noi
validity or tenability without taking the rank assigned at the time of
appointment as Assistant Civil Surgeon is illegal, arbitrary and violative of
Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently quash
and set aside the same and declare that the petitioner is entitled for
promotion as Deputy Civil Surgeon taking rank assigned at the time of initial
appointment with all consequential benefits such as seniority, pay and
allowances, etc., in the interest of justice and be pleased to pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP 12839 OF 2011
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased fix an early date of hearing of the main writ petition in the interest of
justice and pleased to pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 38750 OF 2017
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased to fix an early date of hearing of the writ petition W.P.No. 10443 of
2011, in the interest of justice and pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2018
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representation
dated 08-06-2018 submitted by the petitioner for the relaxation of 86 days
from 03-01-1992 and re-fix my seniority as per rank No.83 of 1991 selection
for the promotion of Civil Surgeon, and pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2019
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased pleased to permit the petitioner to bring additional documents and
grounds on record
IA NO: 2 OF 2019
3
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased pleased to permit the petitioner to amend the main prayer as a) to
issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ
of Certirari calling for the records pertaining to the records dated 18-02-
2010 in O.A.No. 4910/2007 on the file of the Honourable AP Administrative
Tribunal, Hyderabad in rejecting the claim of the applicant for promotion to
the post of Deputy Civil Surgeon on the ground that the claim of the
applicant for seniority from the date of original appointment on the basis of
Rule 33 of A.P. State and subordinate services rules has no validity or
tenability without taking the rank assigned at the time of appointment as
Assistant Civil Surgeon is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of article 14, 16 and
21 of the Constitution of India, b) to declare the action of the respondents in
issuing the impugned speaking order in Rc.No. 2210/E6. C/2018 dated 26-
10-2018 rejecting the seniority position is given to the petitioner pushing her
down to Sl.No. 11285 instead of Sl.No. 10354 is illegal, unjust, arbitrary and
in violative of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, c)
consequently quash and set aside the order dated 18-02-2010 passed in
O.A.No. 4910/2007 on the file of the Honourable A.P. State Tribunal,
Hyderabad and also the impugned speaking order in Rc. No.
2210/E6.C/2018, dated 26-10-2018
IA NO: 1 OF 2020
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be
pleased Pleased to expedite the hearing of the above WP No. 10443 of
2011 by fixing an early date and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. J SUDHEER
2. G JAYENDRA BALAJI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR MED HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE
4
The Court made the following:
ORDER:[per Hon'ble Sri Justice A.Hari Haranadha Sarma] Introductory:
1. [i] The present Writ Petition is directed against the orders dated 18.02.2010 passed in O.A.No.4910 of 2007 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (APAT), where under the application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 by the writ petitioner herein with a prayer to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Deputy Civil Surgeon by taking into account her selection seniority instead of joining date as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Rule 33 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 and also Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
[ii] The petitioner's grievance is that as per the selection seniority her place is with Sl.No.10354 whereas, the seniority fixed basing on joining date is Sl.No.11285, whereby she is aggrieved and the seniority shall be based on the original selection merit list but not on the joining date. Learned APAT dismissed the O.A.No.4910 of 2007. Aggrieved thereby, the present writ petition is filed questioning the orders of the learned APAT dated 18.02.2010.
[iii] Further, during the pendency of the writ petition before this Court, consequent to the orders in I.A.No.1 of 2018, dated 12.09.2018, wherein a direction was given in this case to pass appropriate orders on the 5 representation of the applicant despite pendency of the writ petition. Whereupon orders dated 26.10.2018 were passed by the Respondent No.2 vide Rc.No.2210/E6.C/2018, by way of speaking orders assigning the reason for fixation of her seniority vide Sl.No.11285 instead of Sl.No.10354 on the ground that the applicant was permitted to join subject to G.O.Ms.No.230, Health, Medical & Family Welfare (B2) Department, dated 01.02.1990. The guidelines are very clear that time can be extended maximum upto one year on the ground of completing any PG course. But, if joining is beyond one year, the selected candidates will be placed in the last place of the particular selection list. Accordingly, the writ petitioner herein was placed at the position i.e. Sl.No.11285. Therefore, her claim to place in Sl.No.10354 cannot be considered.
[iv] The petitioner has got her prayer amended pursuant to the orders of this Court dated 24.10.2019 to add the additional prayer for declaring the speaking orders dated 26.10.2018 passed by the respondents, rejecting her prayer in the representation as illegal, unjust and arbitrary and pass appropriate orders more particularly in the form of the Writ of Certiorari.
Sequence of events:-
Case of the petitioner:
2. [i] The petitioner was selected for the post of Civil Assistant Surgeon in the year 1991 after passing MBBS in the year 1990. While 6 pursuing her P.G. Diploma in Gynecology at Guntur Medical College, posting orders were issued vide Rc.No.5640/E8.C/91, dated 16.12.1991 and she was posted at Government Hospital, Repalli, Guntur District. The petitioner has submitted a representation to allow her to join the services after completion of P.G. course in the year 1993 and she was permitted to join the P.G. course.
[ii] The services of the petitioner were regularized vide Rc.No.3266/E8A/2024, dated 27.05.2005 with effect from 03.04.1993. As per the provisional seniority list of Civil Assistant Surgeons for the recruitment batch of 1989-2000, the petitioner was placed at Seniority Sl.No.11285, whereas she is entitled to be placed below to one Dr.P.Ratnavali at Sl.No.10354. She has raised the objection on fixation of her seniority.
[iii] The petitioner has submitted another representation on 10.02.2007, claiming benefit in terms of Rule 33 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules to place as per the ranking fixed at the initial appointment. Even after renewal of representation vide Lr.No.14339/ E8.B/2007, dated 08.08.2007, no action was taken.
[iv] Regularization of the services of the petitioner is subject to the ranking assigned to by the Selection Committee at the time of original appointment and not as per the date of joining of service. Whereas, her seniority is fixed with reference to date of joining, ignoring the rank assigned 7 at the time of initial appointment and the same is irrational and against the Rule 33 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules and also judgment of this Court in B. Mary Jalaja vs. S. Vasantha Vani and others1. Since her request was not considered, the petitioner moved the APAT by filing O.A.No.4910 of 2007. But, without considering Rule 33 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules and settled law, the APAT passed the impugned judgment not interfering with the seniority fixed on the basis of the joining date. Therefore, the petitioner is aggrieved and entitled for the relief as prayed for.
Contention of the Respondents:
3. [i] Seniority of the petitioner was fixed as per G.O.Rt.No.230, dated 01.02.1990. The petitioner did not report to duty within one year of the date of issuing appointment orders. Hence, her seniority was fixed below to the last candidate who joined duty in the concerned panel of selected candidates of that batch in terms of G.O.Rt.No.230, dated 01.02.1990. Therefore, the seniority was fixed as per rules and legal.
[ii] G.O.Rt.No.230, dated 01.02.1990 clearly states as how to fix the seniority of the candidates who have gone for prosecuting for P.G. Course. The petitioner has reported for duty on 03.04.1993. Her services were also regularized with effect from 03.04.1993. The seniority of the petitioner was shown at Sl.No.11285 i.e. below the last selected candidate 1 (1996) 2 ALD 613: 1995 SCC OnLine AP 472 8 of 1991 batch, since her joining date is beyond the time frame of one year contemplated.
[iii] The judgment relied on by the petitioner i.e. B. Mary Jalaja vs. S. Vasantha Vani and others (1 supra) pertains to the dispute in fixing of inter-se seniority among the two candidates who got selected for the post of Lecturer and joined within the time given. Therefore, the facts of the case cited are different and same does not apply to the petitioner's case.
[iv] For fixation of seniority of Government Servants reckoning seniority as per the original ranking given in the initial selection list cannot be extended to the petitioner as permission was granted to the petitioner subject to condition that she has to take last rank among the candidates selected in that batch, in terms of G.O.Rt.No.230, dated 01.02.1990. The orders passed by the learned Tribunal / APAT are justified. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
4. Heard both sides extensively.
Analysis, Discussion and Findings:
5. [i] It is not in dispute that the petitioner was permitted to join in terms of G.O.Rt.No.230, dated 01.02.1990.
[ii] It is also not in dispute that as per G.O.Rt.No.230, dated 01.02.1990 says wherever, the joining is beyond one year, the candidate should take seniority in the last rank of the batch. Relevant part of G.O.Rt.No.230, dated 01.02.1990 reads as follows: 9
4. Government after careful examination of the matter permit the Director of Health that:-
(1) In the case of Civil Assistant Surgeons who have requested for extension of joining time to complete their Post Graduate Degree or Diploma course and such extension does not exceed one year from the date of issue of appointment orders, inclusive of 60 days granted originally to join duty, permission may be given to extend joining time to complete the remaining part of the academic year without loss of seniority subject to the condition that such extension does not exceed one year from the date of issue of appointment orders.
(2) In other cases of candidates seeking extension of joining time exceeding one year from the date of issue of appointment orders, they may also be granted such extension subject to the condition that they will loose their seniority and shall be placed below the last candidate, who joins duty in the concerned panel of selected candidates of that batch. In cases where the selection of the next batch has also taken place, candidates selected earlier and permitted to complete their Post Graduate course of Degree or Diploma by giving extension of joining time exceeding one year, shall be placed at the bottom of all the candidates of the next batch also. It should however, be ensured that only so much of extension is given as would enable the selected candidates to complete his Post Graduate course.
(3) Amongst candidates of the same batch given extension of joining time exceeding one year, their original inter-se seniority shall be retained irrespective of their dates of joining, subject to conditions 1 and 2 stated above.
(4) Extension of time to join duty on account of failure to pass the Post Graduate course of Degree/Diploma shall not be granted.
[iii] The judgment cited or the rule quoted is applicable where the joining is within the time contemplated. Since the petitioner joined beyond 10 the time fixed, she cannot dispute the action of the Respondents. Petitioner has taken the benefit of extension of time for more than one year, completed the P.G. course. Now, she is asking to put the clock back which cannot be appreciated.
[iv] Further, it is also relevant to note that orders in I.A.No.1 of 2018 in this writ petition dated 12.09.2018 are only directing the authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 08.06.2018 on its own merits unmindful of the pendency of the writ petition and to pass appropriate orders. The caution employed indicates that direction is innocuous. The authorities passed the orders in compliance of the said direction. Said orders are also questioned in this writ petition by amending the prayer. The orders passed by the authorities are clear indicating the reasons for not considering the contention of the writ petitioner. Speaking orders vide Rc.2210/E6.C/2018, dated 26.10.2018 reads as follows:
In the reference 1st cited, Dr.G.Geetha Bai, Deputy Civil Surgeon, Guntur Medical College, Guntur has submitted she was appointed as Civil Assistant Surgeon by the selection committee with Rank-83 in the year 1991 and was posted as CAS Repalle, Government Hospital, Guntur District, by that she was doing P.G. n Gynecology at GMC, Guntur, and she got the permission from the then DH to join in service after completion of PG studies upto May 1993.
Accordingly she has applied for reposting order on 09-03-1993 i.e. before completion of PG course. Subsequently, Director of Health has given reposting order to Gadevanipalle, Guntur District and reported for duty on 03.04.1993.11
Hence, the individual is requesting to consider her seniority 10353 instead of 11285 duly considering her PG study period requesting to re- fix her seniority basing on the rank obtained in the 1st selection in 1991.
In view of the above, after examination of the records available the following observations are found.
1. The Government vide G.O.Ms. No.625, HM&FW (B2) Department, Dated: 25-11-1991 approved the selection list of (787) Civil Assistant Surgeons selected by the committee.
2. Accordingly, Dr.G.Geetha Bai, was selected as CAS during the recruitment 1991 with roster point (83), and issued appointment orders vide procdgs. Rc. No. 5640/E8.C/1991, Dated: 16-12-1991.
3. Later the individual has submitted a representation stating that, she is undergoing P.G. Diploma in Gynecology at GMC, Guntur.
Hence requested to permit her to join after completion of her P.G. Course.
4. Accordingly she was permitted to join duty after completion of her P.G. Course upto May, 1993, subject to condition that she has to take last rank among the candidates selected in that batch, if the P.G. Course exceeds one year period, vide this office Rc.No.1501/E8.C/1992, Dated:03-01-1992.
5. The individual has represented before this office on 03-03-1993 on completion of her P.G. Course and she has been issued posting orders to PHC, Gadevaripalli, Guntur District vide Rc.No.05987/E6.Α/1993, Dated:22-03-1993 and she has joined at place of posting on 03-04-1993.
6. (a) As such her 1st Appointment orders were issued on 16-12- 1991.
(b) Date of Joining in service after completion of P.G. Course on 03-04-1993.
(c) Gap period between the 1st appointment and joining in service is (1) Year (3) months and (17) days.
7. Hence, her seniority was fixed below the last candidate in the 1991 batch with rank No.11285.
s 12
8. Her Services were regularized w.e.f. the date of joining i.e. from 03-04-1993 and probation period was declared in the cadre of CAS. Later she was promoted as Deputy Civil Surgeon w.e.f. 26-10-2007 with rank number 11285 and she is presently working as Deputy Civil Surgeon till date.
In view of the above, the request of Dr.G.Geethabai, CAS for refixation of her seniority is hereby rejected since the he has given her willingness to take last rank in the batch to complete her P.G. course or her own interest, more over the seniority with fixed nearly (25) years earlier, she has taken Deputy Civil Surgeon promotion with rank number 11285.
[v] The reasoning of the Respondents as well as the learned APAT are in tune with legal, logical and factual position and no grounds are found to interfere with the orders.
[vi] In view of the reasons stated above, no illegality or irregularity or irrationality is found in the impugned orders passed by the learned APAT.
[vii] Therefore, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed.
6. In the result, the Writ petition is dismissed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN _________________________________ JUSTICE A.HARI HARANADHA SARMA Date:24.07.2025 Knr 13 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. KRISHNA MOHAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA W.P.No.10443 of 2011 24th July, 2025 Knr