GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.versusA.V. VENUGOPALA RAO

        GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR.                          A
                                  v.
                     A.V. VENUGOPALA RAO

                        NOVEMBER 14, 1994

         [K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.]                       B

    SERVICE LAW-Promotion-Legality of provisional seniority list
challenged-Pending finalisation of seniority list, interim arrangement
made by State Government to avoid administrative hardship-Order of
administrative Tribunal upsetting interim arrangement-Whether C
sustainable-Held, No.

     Pending finalisation of the seniority list, the Incharge arrangement
was made to keep s~nior most in the provisional list of the respective
divisions who were eligible for promotion to the post of Executive
Engineer as Incharge and that arrangement was being worked out D
satisfactorily. The Administrative Tribunal while upsetting the interim
arrangement directed that the direction issued by the Tribunal will not
preclude the authorities from putting an existing Executive Engineer in
additional charge of the post of Executive Engineer or an existing
Superintending Engineer similarly wherever required. Any incharge
arrangements to the posts of Executive Engineers, Superintending E
Engineers, or Chief Engineers made after interim order, were revoked
and they were divested of that charge. This part of the order of the
Tribunal was challenged before this Court.

    Allowing the appeal, this Court
                                                                       F
      HELD : The Tribunal· was not justified in upsetting the· interim
arrangement which had got a rational and reasonable basis to avoid
administrative hardship or heart burning to the persons who claimed
to the posts of respective Executive Engineers, Superintending
Engineers and the Chief Engineers, as the case may be. Under the
circumstances, the order of the Tribunal is set aside and the interim G
incharge arrangement made by the State Government would continue
till the disposal of the matter pending before the Tribunal.
                                                      (474-H, 475-A)

    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION           Civil Appeal No. 7828 of
1994.                                                                  H
                                 473
    474                     SUPREME COURT P.EPORTS          (1994) SUPP. 5 S.C.R.

A       From the Judgment and Order dated 28.4.94 of the Andhra Pradesh
     Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A. No. 6190of1993.

          K. Madhava Reddy and G. Prabhakar for the Appellants.

          B. Kanta Rao for the Respondent.
B         The following Order of the Court was delivered:

          Leave granted.

        In th(l impugned order dated April 28, 1994, the Andhra Pradesh
   Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 6190/93 directed that the direction
c  issued by the Tribunal "will not preclude the authorities from putting an
   existing Executive Engineer in additional charge of the post of Executive
   Engineer or an existing Superintending Engineer similarly wherever
   required. The Committee also will examine the aspect that where there are
   no controversies, the consideration ·of promotion of Executive Engineers
   should be placed before: the Tribunal for any further directions. Any
D incharge arrangements to the posts of Executive Engineers, Superintending
   Engineers or Chief Engineers made after interim order, are revoked and
   they stand divested of that charge, within one week." This part of the order
   is now mainly assailed iri this appeal. Before issuing of notice to the
   respondent by our proceedings dated July 13, 1994, Shri K. Madhava
E Reddy, learned senior counsel had stated that pending finalisation of the
   seniority list, the lncharges arrangement was made to keep senior most in
   the provisional list of the respective divisions who are eligible for
   promotion to the post of Executive Engineer as incharge so as to avoid
   heart burning among the officers and that arrangement is being worked out
   satisfactorily. The impugned directions would create administrative
F ·problems.    Therefore, when such statement was made we directed the
   learned counsel to place on record of provisional seniority list and orders of
   Incharge given to the stated senior most persons in the respective divisions.
   Accordingly, they have placed on record the provisional seniority list and
   also order of incharge arrangement from the respective divisions. This
   position has not been controverted. However, the learned counsel for the         '·
G respondent in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of ti\e respondent has
   controverted the correctness and legality of the provisional seniority list as
   such. Since that matter is now pending adjudication in the Tribunal, we
   direct the Tribunal to look into the matter.

        As to what is done, is an interim arrangement of the Government for
H    smooth functioning of the department, we think that the Tribunal was not
            GOVERNMENT OF A. P. v. A.V. VENUGOPALA RAO                 475

  justified in upsetting the interim arrangement which has got a rational and A
  reasonable basis to avoid administrative hardship or heart burning to the
  persons who claimed to the posts of respective Executive Engineers,
  Superintending Engineers and the Chief Engineers, as the case may be.
  Under these circumstances, the above quoted order of the Tribunal is set
  aside and the interim incharge arrangement made by the State Government
  would continue till the disposal of O.As pending before the Tribunal. The B
· Tribunal is directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible
  preferably within a period of six months from the date of the receipt of this
  order. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.

 A.G.                                                     Appeal allowed.