Ranganath Misra, J. - (1.) The group of writ petitions under Art. 32 of the Constitution is at the instance of several directly recruited Assistant Engineers now designated as Deputy Executive Engineers in the Engineering Service of the Roads and Buildings division of Andhra Pradesh Government. Writ Petition No. 12401 of 1985 is by 13 Assistant Engineers of the same service who were also directly recruited. The challenge in the batch of writ petitions is mainly to an order of the Chief Engineer, respondent 2 therein, by asking for quashing of his order dated 8th of June, 1984 by which he regularised temporary service of promotees in the years 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75 to the cadre of Assistant Engineers (Deputy Executive Engineers). According to the petitioners, the retrospective regularisation made by the Chief Engineer of the promotees to the posts of Assistant Engineers is without authority and is in gross violation of the prescription of the Rules. They have asked for a direction to the State Government and its authorities in Writ Petition No. 12401 of 1985 to consider the claim of direct recruits for promotion as Executive Engineers and consequential reliefs. In the batch of writ petitions as also in the other writ application some promotee engineers have been impleaded as representatives of promotees and transferees in the division.
(2.) There are two sets of rules operating side by side in the State of Andhra Pradesh which are relevant. The first is known as the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Services Rules promulgated with effect from March 7, 1962 under the proviso to Art. 309. These have been referred to as 'General Rules, and for convenience we maintain the same term in our judgment. On June 27, 1967, another set of rules known as Andhra Pradesh (Roads and Buildings) Engineering Service Rules with retrospective effect from April 1, 1965, were promulgated. These have been referred to as 'Special Rules, by the Administrative Tribunal and in our judgment those will also be referred to that way. Under R. 3(l) of the Special Rules the method of recruitment to the category of Assistant Engineers has been provided and the methods are:- (i) By direct recruitment; or (ii) By promotion of Junior Engineers; or (iii) By recruitment by transfer from Supervisor or Draughtsman Special Grade or Draughtsman Special Grade I of the Andhra Pradesh (R and B) Engineering Subordinate Service. Sub-rule (3)(a) of R. 3 prescribes that of the substantive vacancies in the category of Assistant Engineers, 37 1/2% shall be filled up by direct recruitment and the remaining 62 1/2% by transfer of Supervisors and Draughtsmen and by promotion of Junior Engineers. The main complaint of the direct recruits has been that notwithstanding this prescription in the rules, there has been under recruitment of Assistant Engineers by direct recruitment and the recruits through the other two modes have come into the cadre far in excess of the limit provided by the rule and regularisation of such recruitment has been made by exercising powers under R. 23 of the General Rules. In the writ petition it has been pleaded that though five year qualifying service was necessary in the lower service for entitlement to consideration for promotion as Assistant Engineer, the period has been reduced to three years to enable larger recruitment from the alternate sources to the prejudice of direct recruits. Reference has been made in the writ petition to the decision of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal and it has been contended that in spite of such decision and in the teeth of the rules, Government have failed to make direct recruitment and have prejudiced their claim to seniority. The respondents have controverted these allegations.
(3.) By a separate judgment delivered today, we have dismissed Civil Appeal No. 1995 of 1977 which was by two direct recruits to the post of Assistant Engineer. The conclusion has been on the basis of the facts stated therein.;