Holding

The Supreme Court held that a separate cadre for Hyderabad City Police was organized, recruitment to the post of Police Officer under the Hyderabad Act had been made, and the officers belong to that separate cadre, not Zone VI, thereby setting aside the High Court’s contrary conclusions.

Summary

The case concerned the status of Hyderabad City Police officers under the Andhra Pradesh Employment (Organization of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 (the Presidential Order) and the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli. The petitioners, appointed as Sub‑Inspectors of Hyderabad City Police, challenged a government order that repatriated them to their parent cadres, arguing that a separate cadre for Hyderabad City Police had been created and that the exclusion clause in paragraph 14(f) of the Presidential Order barred their transfer. The High Court had held that no separate cadre existed, that no recruitment to the post of Police Officer under the Hyderabad Act had occurred, and that the officers belonged to Zone VI. The Supreme Court examined the legislative scheme, the exclusion clause, and the recruitment advertisements, concluding that a distinct cadre for Hyderabad City Police had indeed been organized and that recruitment to the post of Police Officer had been made. Consequently, the High Court’s conclusions (b), (c) and (d) were set aside. The appeals were allowed, restoring the validity of the repatriation order and confirming the separate cadre status of Hyderabad City Police officers.

Issues considered

The existence of a separate cadre for Hyderabad City Police under paragraph 3(6) of the Presidential Order, 1975.
Whether recruitment to the post of Police Officer as defined in Section 3(b) of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli, was ever made.
Whether Hyderabad City Police officers should be treated as part of Zone VI or as belonging to a distinct cadre.
The effect of the exclusion clause in paragraph 14(f) of the Presidential Order in light of Article 371D(10) of the Constitution.
The legality of the Government Order repatriating the officers to their parent cadres.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. 309, s. 313, s. 371D, s. 371E

Subjects

service lawlocal cadresPresidential OrderHyderabad City PoliceArticle 371Dtransferrepatriationexclusion clauseseparate cadrerecruitment

Judgment

,
,.
-t
[2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 171

·, P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. A
v.

. STATE OF A P. AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 5141 of 2002)

OCTOBER 9, 2009

[B.N. AGRAWAL AND G.S. SINGHVI, JJ.]
B

_,
Service Law:

Andhra Pradesh Employment (Organization of Local c
_... Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 -
Paras 3(6) and 14(f) - Division of State into five/six Divisions
for providing· equitable employment opportunities for people
of different areas - The Presidential Order of 1975 notifying
different departments and categories of posts for creation of D
~ separate cadres therefor - Post of police officer as defined
in s. 3(b) of Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli excluded'

- from the purview of Presidential Order - Transfer of police
officials from Hyderabad City Police to other zonal cadres and
vice versa, -set aside by judicial orders - Repatriation of the
police officials to their parent cadre by Government Order -
E
Challenge to Government Order set aside by Tribunal -
Allowed by High Court - On appeal, held: Order repatriating
the police officials to their parent cadre was correct - Separate
cadre was organized for the city of Hyderabad within meaning

... of Para 3(6) - The exclusion clause contained in Para 14(f) F
excludes applicability of the Presidential Order to the posts
in question - Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli - s. 3
(b) - Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 371-D and 371-E.

On the backdrop of agitation demanding separate G
statehood for Telangana area, a six point formula was
evolved. The formula inter-alia provided for dividing the
State as a whole in five/six divisions for equitable
employment opportunities for people of different areas by
171 H
172 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A ensuring preferential treatment to local candidates. Twin
cities of ·Hyderabad and Secunderabad were to be
constituted into a separate division. For giving effect to
the six-point formula, Articles 371-D and 371-E were
inserted in the Constitution of India. In exercise of power
B under Article 371-0(1), President of India made Andhra
Pradesh Employment (Organization of Local Cadres and
Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975
(Presidential Order). In pursuance of Para 3(6) of the
Presidential Order, Government of India issued
c Notification, notifying the departments and categories of
posts for which separate c~dres were required to be
organized for the city of Hyderabad. The post of Police
Officer as defined ins. 3(b) of Hyderabad City Police Act,
1348 Fasli was excluded from the purview of the r
Presidential Order by virtue of Para 14(f) thereof. By the
0
Government orders, viz.728 dated 01.11.1975 issued by
Government of India, 729 and 730 dated 01.11.1975 issued
by State Government, the posts of Police Officers were
excluded from the purview of the Presidential Order. In
the further Government Order No. 795 dated 30.06.1976
E also, the post of Police Officer was specifically excluded.
Thereafter, Andhra Pradesh Members of Police Force
(Regulation of Transfers) Act 1985 was enacted.

Before and after enactment of 1985 Act, transfer of
F police officials from Hyderabad City Police to other
districts and transfer of police officials from zonal cadres
to Hyderabad City Police were set aside by different
orders passed by the High Court and Tribunal. In view of
these orders, State Government issued G.O.Ms. No. 349
G Home (Police C) Department dated _15.12.1997 whereby,
the private respondents (Police Inspector in Hyderabad
City Police) were repatriated to their parent cadres in
other police ranges.

The private respondents challenged the G.0.Ms. No.
H

.:·· '~
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A. P. 173
AND ORS.
,349_ The Tribunal dismissed the applications. The private A
respondents filed writ petitions challenging the order of
the Tribunal. High Court disposed of the same inter-alia
holding that (i) No separate cadre has been organised for
the City of Hyderabad within the meaning of para 3(6) of
the Presidential Order; (ii) No recruitment to the post of B
a police officer as defined in Sec. 3(b) of Hyderabad City
Police Act 1348 Fasli has been made and there is thus
factually no incumbent of the post of police officer under
para 14(f) of the Presidential Order; (iii) Inspectors of
Police workin-g in the Hyderabad City Police c
establishments, either on .promotion to that post or by
direct recruitment, must be considered as be1onging to
Zone VI in the zonal cadre. Hence. the firesent appeals.

Allowing the appeals, the Court
D
HELD: 1. The conclusions recorded by the Full
Bench of the High Court that no separate cadre has been
organized for the city of Hyderabad within the meaning
of paragraph 3(6) of the Presidential Order; that no
recruitment to the post of Police Officer as defined in E
Section 3(b) of the Hyderabad Act has been made and
there is factually no incumbent of the post of Police Officer
under paragraph 14(f) of the Presidential Order and that
the Inspectors of Police working in the Hyderabad City
Police establishment either on promotion to that post or F
by direct recruitment must be considered as belonging
to lone VI in the zonal cadre cannot be sustained and
are liable to be set aside. [Para 32] [220-G-H; 221-A-B]

2. Presidential Order, i.e. Andhra Pradesh
employment (Organ~ation of Local Cadres and G
Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975, was issued
for providing equitable opportunities and facilities for the
people belonging to different parts of the State in the
matters of public employment and education and by
H
174 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A virtue of clause (10) of Article 3710, overriding effect has
been given to the Presidential Order qua other
constitutional and statutory provisions. For achieving the
objective set out in clause (1) of Article 3710, provisions
have been made in the Presidential Order for localization/
B zonalization of cadres and giving preference to the
candidates belonging to the particular local area. [Para
28] [216-E-G]

3. Two exceptions have been carved out in the ;-

c Presidential Order in respect of certain categories of
posts for the city of Hyderabad. One such exception is
discernible from the language of paragraphs 3(6) and 6(3).
The other exception is in the form of exclusion clause
contained in paragraph 14(f) which operates on its own
and does not depend on the issue of Notification by the
D Central Government. By virtue of that paragraph, the
~
provisions contained in the Presidential Order have been
made inapplicable to the specified posts, which include
any post of Police Officer as defined in clause (b) of
Section 3 of the Hyderabad Act. This was made more ~~
E explicit by paragraph 8 of G.O.P. No.728 dated 1.11.1975 '"'
issued by the Government of India, paragraphs 5 and/21 '.._
of G.O. Ms. No.729 dated 1.11.1975 and paragraph 2 of
G.O. Ms. No.730 of the same date (both issued by the
·Government of Andhra Pradesh). When G.O. Ms. No.795
F dated 30.6.1976 was issued incorporating therein the
scheme for organization of focal cadres for non ..gazetted
categories of posts (both Executive and Ministerial) ahd
other posts equivalent to or lower than Lower Oivisio:i
Clerk, the post of Police Officer as defined in clause (b)
G of Section 3 of the Hyderabad Act was specifically
excluded. In paragraph 16 of G.O. Ms. No.795, it was
made clear that as no separate cadre for the city of ._

Hyderabad needs to be organized for the police
department and only ministerial staff of the office of
H Commissioner of Police will be included in Zone VI. The
-c:

i .
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A P. 175
AND ORS.
.
~

posts of the Police Officers of Hyderabad City were not A
shown in the cadre strength of the localized cadres
contained in Annexures IV, V, XII and XIII appended to
G.O. Ms. No.795. This was so because there was no

- localization of Hyderabad City Police cadres. This was
also the reason why a separate range i.e., City Range was
created for Hyderabad, Secunderabad and other areas
B

mentioned in First Schedule to the Presidential Order.
-; [Para 28) [217-8, F-H; 218-A-E]
4. The localization/zonalization of subordinate
cadres in the police department was effected for six c
zones/ranges but the same was not applicable to
Hyderabad City Police. If this was not so, there was no
reason to exclude posts earmarked for Hyderabad City
from the statement of cadre strength of localized cadres
enumerated in various Annexures appended to G.O. Ms. D
No.795 dated 30.6.1976. The object of exclusion of
certain posts from the purview of the Presidential Order
and consequently from the scheme of localization/
zonalization required to be undertaken in terms of
paragraphs 3 and 6 thereof was to make recruitment E
against such posts open for all without giving any
preference to any local candidate. The reason why
special status was given to the posts located in the
specified departments of Hyderabad City, which is capital
of the State, was that there should be no monopoly of F
candidates belonging to any particular area of the State
in the matter of recruitment etc. against those posts and
all eligible candidates must get opportunity to compete
-4 for selection and appointment. [Para 29] [218-F-H; 219-A-
B] G
J 5. After promulgation of the Presidential Order,
Hyderabad City has throughout been treated as an
indep~ndent zone or free zone till the impugned
judgment was pronounced and recruitment to the post
of Police Officer as defined in Section 3(b) of the H
176 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A Hyderabad Act was made separately. This was the
categorical stand taken by the official respondents before 't
the Tribunal while contesting the O.A. of the private ~
respondents. It was specifically averred on behalf of the I

State that vacancies in respect of posts of Hyderabad City
s Police are notified separately and selections/
appointments to the posts of Sub-Inspectors of Police,
Civil and Reserve Sub-Inspector, CAR and Police
Constables of both Civil and CAR to the extent of
vacancies are conducted separately and all six zones and
c Hyderabad City Police are separate zones for all service ..
matters i.e., appointments, promotions, etc. and
Hyderabad City Police is not part and parcel of Zone VI.
The contra stand taken in the counter affidavits filed
before this Court is inexplicable and is liable to be
discarded. [Para 30] [219-B-F]
0
6. Tpe observations of the Full Bench of High Court
that no separate cadre has been organized and no Police
Officer has been appointed under the Hyderabad Act is
based on the premise that in the advertisement issued for
E recruitment of Police Officers and appointment orders of
the appellants and other similarly situated persons,
reference has not been made to Hyderabad Act. While
doing so, the Full Bench omitted to take note of the fact
that in terms of Section 7 of the Hyderabad Act, powers
F to appoint and promote Inspector, Sub-Inspector and
other subordinates of the police force vests in the ~
Commissioner of City Police Hyderabad and the saiu/
Section finds specific mention in the preamble tr- che
Special Rules framed in 1959. Rule 3 of those Rules "
G clearly lays down that as far as Hyderabad City Police is
concerned, the Commissioner of Police shall be the t
appointing authority of Sub-Inspectors of Police etc. and __ ......
by virtue of Jhat power, the Commissioner of Police,~ .
Hyderabad has been making appointments on various
H subordinate posts including those of Sub-Inspectors. In
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A. P. 177
AND ORS.

the advertisement of 1985 pursuant to which the A
appellants were appointed as Sub-Inspectors, 93 posts
were separately earmarked for Hyderabad City which, for
the sake of convenience, was described as Zone VII or
free zone. Even in the subsequent advertisements issued
in 1991 and 1994, the vacancies of Sub-Inspectors were B
separately earmarked for Hyderabad City Police Range.
The orders of appointment of the appellants were issued
by the Commissioner of Police. This shows that a
separate cadre has been carved out for Hyderabad City
Police and recruitment to the post of Police Officer as c
defined in Section 3(b) of the Hyderabad Act has been
made by the designated competent authority in terms of
Section 7 thereof. Therefore, the Full Bench was not
justified in curtailing the width and scop_e of the exclusion
clause contained in paragraph 14(f) of the Presidential D
Order by holding that there is no separate cadre of
Hyderabad City Police and there is no incumbent of the
post of Police Officers as defined in Section 3(b) of the
Hyderabad Act. [Para 31] (219-G-H; 220-A-G]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. E
5141 of 2002.

From the Judgment & Order dated 23.11.2001 of the High
Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ
Petition No. 13572 of 2001. F
WITH

C.A. Nos. : 5144, 5142 of 2002 and 2695 of 2003.

L.N. Rao, Anoop G. Choudhari, G. Ramakrishna Prasad,
G
_.
Suyodhan Byrapaneni, Siddharth Patnaik, Narendra Kumar,
M.K. Sinha, T. Anamika, T.N. Rao, Manoj Saxena (for T.V.
George) K. Radha Rani (for D. Mahesh Babu),· C.S.N. Mohan
Rao, for the appearing parties.
.~

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by H
' -\ .

178 SUPREME COURT ,REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) s~c.R.

A G.S. SINGHVI, J. 1. The State o.f' Andhra 8.radesh
comprises of three regions known as Andhra area, Telahgana
... _
area and Raylaseema area. At the time of formation ~f the
State in 1956, certain safeguards were envisaged for
Telangana area in the matters of dev~opment, employment
B opportunities and educational facilities for the residents of that
area. The legislature enacted the Public Employment
(Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957 for providing
employment opportunities for the residents of Telangana area
but the relevant provisions of that Act were declared
c unconstitutional by this Court. In 1969, an agitation was
launched by some political parties demanding separate
· statehood for Telangana area on the ground that people of that
·area were not getting their due in the matters of education,
government employment and economic development. In the
backdrop of the agitation, a six-point formula was evolved which,
0
among other things, envisaged equitable employment
opportunities and career prospects for the people of different
areas of the State by ensuring preferential treatment to the local
candidates. Subsequently, clarification dated 22.10.1973 was
issued in which it was visualized that the State as a whole may
E consist of five or six divisions and the twin cities of Hyderabad
and Secunderabad including the cantonment will be constituted
into a separate division. This is evident from paragraph 7 of
the cbrification, which reads as under: I~

F "7. In regard to the service the basic approach of the
formula is that the people of different areas should have
equitable employment and career prospects. The
concepts ::if local candidates and local areas are
t
.~

interrelated because local candidates will be identified
G with referen'e to a local area. In specifying any local areas
it should not be necessary to go below the level of district. .
For recruitment of Class IV posts and posts of LDC and
equivalent in district office, the district will then be the local
area. For other categories of posts it would' be desirable
H to group contiguous districts into divisions. We, however,
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF AP. 179
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
visualize that the State as a whole may consist of five or A
six divisions, the twin cities including the .cantonment
being constituted into a separate division."

(emphasis added)

2. For giving effect to the six-point formula, Articles 371 D B
and 371 E were inserted in the Constitution by the Constitution
. (Thirty-second Amendment) Act, 1973. Clauses (1) and (10) of
.
Article 371 D read· as under:

(1) The President may, by order made with respect to the c
State of Andhra Pradesh provide, having regard to the '
requirements of the State as a whole, for equitable
opportunities and facilities for the people belonging to
different parts of the State, in the matter of public
employment and in the matter of education, and different D
provisions may be made for various parts of the State.

(10) The provisions of this article and of any order made
by the President thereunder shall have effect
notwithstanding anything in any other provision of this
Constitution or in any other law for the time being in force. E

3. In exercise of power under clause (1) of Article 371 D,
fhe President made the Andhra Pradesh Employment
(Organization of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct
Recruitment) Order, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the F
Presidential Order'). The relevant provisions of the Presidential
Order, as amended from time to time, read as under:-

"2. INTERPRETATION: In this Order, unless the context
otherwise requi'res.
G
·" (a) 'City of Hyderabad' means the part of the State
comprising the territories specified in the First
Schedule;

(b) xxxx xxxx xxxx H
180 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A (c) 'local area' in relation to any local cadre, means the
local area specified in paragraph 6 for direct
recruitment to posts in such local cadre, and
includes, in respect of posts belonging to the
category of Civil Assistant Surgeons, the local area
B specified in sub-paragraph (5) of paragraph (6) of
this Order;

'(d) to (g) xxxx xxxx xxxx

(h) 'Schedule' means a Schedule appended to this
C Order;

(i) ·Special Office or Establishment' means as Office
or Establishment notified as such by the Central
\ Government;
D (j) ·Specified gazetted category' means any gazetted
category specified in the Third Schedule and
includesany other gazetted category notified as
such by CentralGovernment;

E (I) , 'State-level office or institution' means as office or
·institution serving, or the jurisdiction of which
extends to the State as a whole and notified as
such by the Central Government;

(m) 'Zone' means a zorie specified in the Second
F
S~h~dule comprising the territories mentioned
therAin;

3. Organization of local Cadres:- (1) xxx xxx xxx

G (2) The post::; belonging to the category of lower division
clerk and each of the other categories equivalent to or
lower than that of a lower division clerk in each department
in each district shall be organized into separate cadre.

Explanation:- For the purposes of this sub-paragraph, sub-
H
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 181
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
paragraph-(1) of paragraph 6 and sub-paragraph (1) of A
paragraph 8 a category shall be deemed to be equivalent
to or lower than that of a lower division clerk if the minimum
of the scale of pay of a post belonging to that category or
where the post carries a fixed pay such fixed pay is equal
to or lower than the minimum of the scale of pay of a lower 8
division clerk.

(3) The posts belonging to each non-gazetted category,
other than those referred to in sub-paragraph (2), in each
department in each zone shall be organized into a
separate cadre.
c
(4) The posts belonging to each specified gazetted
category in each department in each zone shall be
organized into a separate cadre.
D
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-paragraphs
(3) and (4), the State Government may where it considers
it expedient so to do and with the approval of the Central
Government, organize the posts belonging to any of the
categories referred to therein, in any department, or any
E
establishment thereof, in two or more contiguous zones
into a single cadre .

• (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-paragraphs
(2), (3), (4) and (5), the Central Government may notify the
departments in which and the categories of posts for which F
a separate cadre has to be organized for the City of
Hyderabad and on such notification, the posts belonging
to each such category in each such department in the said
City (other than those concerned with the administration
of areas falling outside the said City) shall be organized G
into a s~parate cadre and the posts so organized shall be
excluded from the other cadres, in pursuance of this
paragraph or constituted otherwise and comprising of
posts belonging to that categc:y in that department.
H
182 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A 5. Local Cadres and Transfer of Persons:~

(1) Each part of the State, for which a local cadre has been
organized in respect of any category of posts, shall be a
separate unit for purposes of recruitment, appointment,
discharge, seniority, promotion and transfer, and such !--
B
other matters as may be specified by the State
Government in respect of that category of posts.
t
(2) Nothing in this order shall prevent the State Government
from making provision for
c
(a). the transfer of a person from any local cadre to. any
Office or Establishment to which this Order does not apply,
or Vice Versa.

(b) The transfer of a person from local cadre comprising
D posts in any Office or Establishment exercising territorial
jurisdiction over a part of the State to any other local cadre
comprising posts in such part, or Vice Versa.

(c) The transfer of a person from one local cadre to another
E local cadre where no qualified or suitable perso.n is
available in the latter cadre for where such transfer is
otherwise considered necessary in the Public interest.

(d) The transfer of a person from one local cadre to another
•
local cadre on a reciprocal basis subject to the condition
F
that the persons so transferred shall be assigned seniority
in the latter cadre with reference to the date of his transfer
to that cadre.

G
(Vide G.O.Ms. No. 34, G.A. (SPF.A) Dept, dt. 24.01.1981) -
6. Local Areas:- (1) Each district shall be regarded as a
local area.

(i) for direct recruitment to posts in any local cadre
under the State Government comprising all or any
H
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 183
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
of the posts in any department in that district A
belonging to the category of a lower division clerk
or to any other category equivalent to or lower than
that of a lower division clerk.

(ii) For direct recruitment to posts in any cadre
8
under any local authority within that district, carrying
a scale of pay, the minimum of which does not
exceed the minimum of the scale of pay of a lower
division clerk or a fixed pay not exceeding that
amount.
c
(2) Each Zone shall be regarded as a local area.

(i) for direct recruitment to posts in any local cadre
under the State Government comprising all or any
of the posts in any department in that zone 0
belonging to any non-gazetted category other than
those referred to in sub-paragraph (1)

(ii) for direct recruitment to posts in any local cadre
comprising all or any of the post in any department
in that zone belonging to the categories of E
Tahsildars, Asstt. Executive Engineers, Assistant
Agricultural Officers, Inspectors of Police and Motor
Vehicles Inspectors (Vide G.0.Ms. No. 498, dated
' 16.7.1977 G.0.Ms. No. 34, dt. 24.01.1981 and
G.O.Ms. No. 635, (SPF.A) Dept. dated F
30.11.1993).

(iii) for direct recruitment to posts in any cadre under
any local authority within that zone, carrying a scale
of pay, the minimum of which exceeds the clerk but G
does not exceed Rs.480/- per mensem or a fixed
pay which exceeds the minimum of the scale of pay
of a lower division clerk but does not exceed
Rs.480/- per mensem or any amount corresponding
to it as may be specitied in this regard in the H
184 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. r

A successive revisions of pay scales granted by the
.( '
State Government from time to time. (G.O.Ms. No. "
635, G.A. (SFF.A) Dept. dated 30.11.1993).

Provided that where a single cadre has been
organized for two or more zones under sub-
B
paragraph (5) of paragraph 3 of posts belonging to
any of the categories referred to in clause (i) or
clause (ii) each of such zones shall be regarded as
separate local area in respect of such cadre.

C (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-paragraphs
(1) and (2)

(i) the City of Hyderabad shall be regarded as a
local area for direct recruitment to posts in any local -·
D cadre under the State Government comprising all
or any of the Posts in the said City in the
departments and belonging to the categories
notified under Sub-paragraph (6) of paragraph 3 ,.._
and the said City shall be excluded from the local ~

area relatable to any other local cadre comprising ,.
E
posts in the departments anq belonging to the
.1
categories so notified, and

(ii) the City of Hyderabad shall be regarded as a •
local area for direct recruitment to posts in any
F cadre under a local authority within the said City
comprising posts carrying a scale of pay the
minimum of which does not exceed Rs.480/- per
mensum or any amount corresponding to it as may
A!:=
be specified in this regard in the successive
G revisions of pay scales granted by the State
Government from time to time or a fixed pay not .,..
exceeding that amount, and the said City shall be
excluded from the local area relatable to any cadre .r-
under any local authority not within the said City.
H

?'\

r
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 185
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
(G.O.Ms. No. 635, G.A. (SPF.A) Dept. dated A
,.,,
30.11.1993).

10. Power to Authorise issue of Directions:- (1) The
President, may, by order, require the State Government to
issue such directions as may be necessary or expedient B
for the purpose of giving effect to this Order to any local
authority and such local authority shall comply with such ·
directions .
. .,•
(2) The State Government may, for the purpose of issuing
any direction under sub-paragraph (1) or for satisfying itself c
that any directions issued under sub-paragraph (1) have
been complied with require by order in writing any local
authority to furnish them such information, report of
particulars as may be specified in the order and such local
authority shall comply with such order. D
7

11. Order to have-over-riding effect:- The provision of this
order shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained
in any Statute, Ordinance, rule, regulation or other order
made before or after the commencement of this Order in
E
respect of direct recruitment to posts under the State
t Government or any local authority.

~·!" 14. Saving:- Nothing in this Order shall apply to:-

(a) any post in the Secretariat of the State Government, F

(b) any post in an office of the Head of a Deptt.,

(c) any post in a Special Office or Establishment.

(d) any post in a State-level office or Institution. G

-~: - (e) any post other than a post belonging to any of the
non-gazetted categorie$ in the ministerial and
technical services in a Major Development Project;
(G.0.Ms. No. 455, G.A. (SPF.A) Dept., dated H
·r
'
.J
1--

186 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A 3.10.1985 and /'r.

(f) any post Police Officer as defined in clause (b) of
Section 3 of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348
F.
B THE FIRST SCHEDULE

[See paragraph 2(1 )(a) City of Hyderabad]
·i,..-
(a) Hyderabad Municipal
Corporation area:
c (i) Hyderabad
Division
(ii) Secunderabad
Division
(b) Secunderabad '"'
D Cantonment area ....
(c) . Osmania University Campus--
(d) Zamistanpur Village
(e) Fatehnagar Panchayat area
(f) Bowenpalle Panchayat area
E (g) Machabolaram Panchayat area
(h) Lalaguda Village I Village
(i) Malkajgiri Panchayat area
0) Uppal Khalsa. Panchayat area
.... ..,.
(k) Alwal Panchayat area
F (I) Balanagar Panchayat area
(m) Musa pet Panchayat area
(n) Kukatpalli Panchayat area
''°0
THE SECOND SCHEDULE
[See paragraphs 2(1)(m) and 8(4)]
G
ZONES RATIO -~

Zone I
·"'
Srikakulam, Vizianagaram (1st 12
day of June, ·1979)
Visakhapatnam Districts. ·'
'ii
H tL_
-·~
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF AP. 187
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
Zone II East Godavari, West Godavari 18 A
and Krishna Districts.

Zone Ill Guntur, Prakasam and Nellore 15
Districts.
8
Zone IV Chittoor, Cuddapah, Ananthapur 18
and Kurnool Districts.

Zone V Adilabad, Karimnagar, 15
Warangal and Khammam Districts. c
Zone VI Hyderabad, Rangareddy (15th 22
August, 1978), Nizamabad,
Mahboobnagar, Medak and
Nalgonda Districts. D
4. In pursuance of paragraph 3(6) of the Presidential Order,
the Government of India issued notification, GSR No.528E
dated 20.10.1975 and notified the departments in which and
categories of posts for which separate cadres were requirec:t
to be organized for the city of Hyderabad. These were the E
Department of Public Health and Municipal Engineering, Indian
Medicines and Homeopathy, Fire Services, Jail, Judiciary,
Commercial Tax, Education, Employment and Training
Development (Training Wing), National Cadet Corps, Technical
Education, Weights and Measures, Labour, Treasuries and

- Accounts. The post of Police Officer as defined in Section 3(b)
of the Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 Fasli (for short 'the
Hyderabad Act') was not included in that notification because
F

the same had been excluded from the purview of the
Presidential Order by virtue of paragraph 14(f) thereof. G
Thereafter, the Government of India issued instructions vide
order dated 1.11.1975 for organization of the local cadres and
allotment of persons to such cadres. Paragraph 8 of that order
by which certain departments and posts were excluded from
its purview reads thus:-
H
188 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A 8. Departments and posts excluded from the purview of
..
the Order- It should be carefully noted that certain posts i'r-
are altogether excluded from the application of the
provisions of the Presidential Order. By virtue of
paragraph 14 of the Order, posts in the Secretariat,
B Offices of the Heads of Departments, State level Offices/
Institutions, Major Development Projects and Special
Offices or establishments and posts of Police Officers as
defined in clause (b) of Section 3 of the Hyderabad City
Police Act, (1348 F) are excluded. The lists of State Level v •
c Offices/Institutions, Major Development Projects and
Special Offices/establishments have been notified in G.0.1.
notification G.S.R. Nos.527(E), 525 (E) and 526 (E)
respectively, dated 18th October, 1975. As already
indicated, non-gazetted categories of posts exempted by
the notification G.S.R. No.529(E), dated 18th October,
D
1975 issued under paragraph 3(8) of the order are also
excluded from. the local cadres. Therefore, departments "
which consist exclusively of posts of the nature or belongs
to categories referred to above automatically get excluded
from the scheme of localization. The departments lists in
E the Annexure to this order will be covered by the scheme.

(emphasis supplied)

5. On the same day i.e., 1.11.1975, the Government of ·.. ~
F Andhra Pradesh issued G.O. Nos.729 and 730. In G.O. No.729,
it was emphasized that the main purpose of the Presidential
Order was to ensure that major share of vacancies arising in
certain categories of posts should be reserved for being ·filled
from among the local candidates. However, in paragraphs 5 ,,•'
and 21 it was made clear that reservation in the matter of direct ....,_
G
recruitment in favour of local candidates do not apply to the
posts specified in paragraph 14(f) of the Presidential Order.
For the sake of convenience, these paragraphs are extracted
below:

H
•. ' ' . '; 1 ' '.-!' ' 3' ' ·' '
P~V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 189
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
' 1J 1- 't ~ , '. ,· I • I

"5. The provisions, of order regarding:reservations in the A
matter of direct recruitment in favour of local candidates
do not, however; apply to the posts specified in para 14
of the Order, viz., posts in the Secretariat in the offices of

- ' I~ the Head of Departments, in' th'e1l sp'ecial Offices/
Establishments ncitfffed· by the Central G'overnm'ent in
G.S.R. No.526(E), ,c;iated 18.10.1975, in Jhe .State Level
B

'~ ·, Offi~es/1n's!itutions· notified by.the 'cerifrai.Government in
· ·G:·sJ~., No.527(E)·, · dateq -1J3.10.1975, .in the Major
Development P'rojects notified by the Centr~I Government
.in
G.s.R.' No.525(E) datedJ8.10J9i5 and posts of police c
,I OffiCefS as defined in C/aLJSe, (b) ·;Of SeCffCJn,, 3 Of fhe
, Hydera,bad Ci~y Police Act, 13~8, Fasli. , !• -.. _

~. ' "'") ~ , :;i ' ~ \J ! • ' ~ .

21. Recruitment of-posts in Secretariat. Offices of Heads
.' 9tDepartments:;etc:c::.. indicated earlier the scheme of , I -As
' .reservation in·favour of local candidates~ wili nbt1apply to D
posts in 1the ~ecretariat,"office b( Heads Department, 1
of'
". -:-and State-1.!evel
•I t . r -
6ffi'ces/inst1t Utidns notified' In G:s.R.
•·· j,. - ,_~ - ' ~ ~ .j.''•

· No.527(E), dated 18.10.1975. Direct recruitmenno fill
posts in these offices will be on a state wide basis. The
. scheme
_,
j~ ., .
of reservation in favour of local candidates will not E
I·· ~ : I . · • , ~ - ..._... ,

also apply to the. posts in spec!~I, ,s>ffic.es/establishm~nt~
notified
' •·)\.. in G.S.R. No.526(E), dated.
. ' . \ ....:
18.10.1975.
. •.
It is the
. . . '' -

'·'
C--
Governments intention that such offices and establishments
should as far as possible cease to be separ~te- units oi
I· appointment and that posts in su.ch offices. and F
establishment shot.!ld not ordinarily be" filleq. by ~irect.
recruitment, but by ,drawing persons on tenure. from
differeni'locaf cadres:o·n an equitable
. ' - j.\:
..,. }.. .
basis.
-
The scherr{e'
'
'·· .._
I - ~

of reservation. does. ' not .
apply to
•
posts. .
in;
'
Major, ....
-.J ~ ~

Development .Projects notified in G.S.R. No.525(E), .dated G
..r 18.10.1975. Here also it the intention of the State is
Government that the ~qsts in such projects should be
largely filled by drawing persons on transfer or t.enure
I J • -

equitably from different local cadres. Where however, any
H
~
190 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A direct recruitment becomes essential it will be done on a r
state wide basis." )r r'."""

(emphasis supplied)

6. In paragraph 2 of G.O. Ms. No.730, the aforesaid
B provision was reiterated in the following words: ,,

"2. The Presidential Order requires that certain categories
of posts shall be organized into appropriate local cadres.
These include all non-Gazetted categories of [posts other • ..
" ~

c than those exempted by virtue of the notification issued
under para-3(8) of the Order - vide Government of India,
Ministry of Home Affairs, GSR 529(E), dated 18.10.1975]
and the posts belonging to the specified gazetted
categories: however, the posts for which the unit of
D appointment is confined to the Secretariat and the Offices
of the Heads of Departments, State level Offices/ y
Institutions, Special Offices/Establishments and Major
Development Projects and posts of Police Officers as
defined in the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 F, are
excluded ..... "
E ~T

7. After about seven months, the State Government issued
....,
G.O. Ms. No. 795 dated 30.6.1976 whereby scheme for '· ~~
organization of_ local cadres for the non-gazetted categories of ..~ ·,.'.....
posts (both Executive and. Ministerial) and other posts
F equivalent to or lower than LDCs was formulated and ,.~}~
circulated. The said scheme was finalized in consultation with ·. ~'/

the Allotment Committee constituted under G.O. Ms. No.7A ~·-sf:-
dated 15.11.1995. As far as the police department is
concerned, the scheme of organization of local cadres excluded
G some of the offices and posts including the post of Police Officer
as defined in clause (b) of Section 3 of the Hyderabad Act.
While creating new Police Ranges vide G.O. Ms. No.1697
dated 10.12.1975, which were 'shown in Annexure - 1
appended to G.O. Ms. No.795, Hyderabad, Secunderabad and
H other areas mentioned in First Schedule to the Presidential
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF AP. t91
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
:>
Order were separately identified as City Range. All this is A
+.... evident from paragraphs 3, 4, 16 and Annexure - 1 appended
to G.O. Ms. No. 795, the relevant portions of which are
reproduced below:

"(3) The following offices of the Police Department are
B
outside the purview of the Andhra Pradesh Public
Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and
Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975 for the
~· reasons given against them:-

Name of Office Reasons for exemption c
1. Office of the Inspector Being office of the Head
... General of Police of the Department.
1
• .....
2. Railway Police Being Special Office or
Establishment vide D
Notification No. GSR
526(E) dated 18.10.1975.

3. Police Communications
Organization E

4. Police Training College,
'/ Anentpur

5. Office of the Deputy Being the State level F
Inspector General of offices of Institution, vide
Police, Railways, Crime Notification No. GSR
and Training, Hyderabad
(E) dated 18.10. 75
G
6. Office of the Deputy
Inspector General of
Police, Railways, Crime
and Training, Hyderabad.
H
192 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
.,,
~

A
7. Police Transport ,;;,
Organization

8. Office of the Director of
B Police Communications
\

9. Office of the Director of
Forensic Science
r
Laboratory, Hyderabad v

c
10. All categories of posts in Being exempted
the Special Police categories vide
Battalions including Notification No. GSR
Special Armed Police, 529(E) dated 18.10.1975
Amberpet other than
D .,.,
Ministerial categories

11. Any post of Police Officer Vide para 14(f) of the
as defined in clause (b) of Presidential Order
Section 3 of the Hyderabad
E City Police Act, 1348-F.
(4) Thus, the Presidential Order dated 18.10.1975 will
apply to the remaining offices of the Police Department as
~
given below -
F 1. Officers of the six Police Ranges
(viz. Northern, Eastern, Central
Southern, Warangal and Hyderabad)

2. Ministerial staff of the office of the Commissioner
G of Police, Hyderabad

3. Ministerial Staff of the Special Police Battalions _")_

including Special Armed Police

4. Ministerial staff of the District Police Office
H
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 193
_, AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
5. District Police i.e. Regular Police Force A
"'(,
(16). As no separate cadre for the City of Hyderabad
needs to be organized for the Police Department, the
Ministerial staff of the office of the Commissioner of Police
....
l
alone will be included in zone VI. However, it will be treated B
as a separate cadre in that zone, the other cadre being
the staff under the jurisdiction of Deputy Inspector General
of Police, Hyderabad Range .
. t-

ANNEXURE - 1 c
New Police Ranges as per Police Ranges prior to
the the order issued in G.O. Ms issue of orders issued in
No.1697, Home dated G.O. Ms No.1697, Home
10.12.1975 dated 10.12.1975
..,,, D
ZONE-1 Northern Range
Head-quarters at
Vishakahpatnam

1. Srikakulam E
2. Vishakhapatnam

.~
.... ZONE-II Eastern Range
Headquarters at
Eluru F
1. East Godavari 1. Srikakulam
2. West Godavari 2. Visakhapatnam
3. Krishna 3. East Godavari
4. West Godavari
ZONE-Ill Central Range G
Headquarters at
.i... Guntur
1. Guntur 1. Krishna
2. Nellore 2. Guntur
3. Prakasam 3. Nellore H
194 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

...
A 4. Prakasam
ZONE-IV Southern Range _Jr
Headquarters at
Kurnool
1. Chittor 1. Chittor
B 2. Cuddapah 2. Cuddapah .;.
3. Anantapur 3. Anantapur
4. Kurnool 4. Kurnool

ZONE-V · Warrangal Range '
v-·

c Headquarters at
Warangal
1. Adilabad 1. Adilabad
2. Karimanagar 2. Karimanagar
3. Warangal 3. Warangal
4. Kahmmam 4. Kahmmam
D
5. Nalgonda

ZONE-VI Hyderabad Range
Headquarters at
Hyderabad
E 1. Hyderabad 1. Hyderabad
2. Nizamabad 2. Nizamabad
3. Mahaboobnagar 3. Mababoobnagar
4. Medak 4. Medak ~
5. Nalgonda
F City Range
Hyderabad and Secunderabad 1. Hyderabad
and other areas as mentioned in
First Schedule to the Presidential 2. Secundernbad
,,
Order
G
8. The posts of Hyderabad City Police were not shown in
Annexures IV, V, XII and XIII appended to G.O. Ms. No.795, ,.:)..
which contained statements showing the cadre strength of
localized cadres in respect of the posts of Constable, Head
Constable, Sub-Inspector and Inspector. The relevant portions
H of those Annexures are extracted below:
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF AP. 195
.... AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
Annexure IV A
......
-
Point No.3 - 40 (34 permanent and 6 temporary) posts
of S.B., C.l.D., Hyd. and 11 (10 permanent and 1
temporary) posts of C.B.CID attached to the City Police
are not shown in the statement as the City Police is not
B
localized.

Annexure V

"' Point No.3 - 16 (11 permanent and 5 temporary) posts
of S.B. and 13 (12 permanent and 1 temporary) posts of c
Crime Branch, C.l.D. are not shown in the statement as
the City Police is not localized.

Annexure XII

Point No.1 - Includes posts of Int., CB & RP. distributed D
to all units. But the posts distributed to the City Police are

- not shown in the statement as City Police is not localized.

Annexure XIII
-.

Point No.1- The posts of CID attached to the City are not E
shown in the statement as City Police is not localized.

9. At this stage, we may notice Sections 3(b), 4 and 7 of
' the Hyderabad Act and Sections 2(b), (c), 3 and 4 of the Andhra
Pradesh Members of Police Force (Regulation of Transfers) F
Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1985 Act').

I
The Hyderabad Act
....{
'
"3(b) "Police Officer" shall be deemed to include every
member of the City Police Force appointed under this Act G

-i and shall also include the Commissioner of City ,Police,
Hyderabad, Deputy or Assistant Commissioner of Police,
and subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section
9 and Sub-Section (2) of Section 10 shall also· include
every person who has been appointed as an additional or H
\. },
·•1·,·

A special Police Officer·."
i\
4. ORGANIZATION OF POLICE - For the, City of
c-i•Hyderabad theh~'shaH be 1app6inted Pq!ic;:e',fcir6~~~~nd its
1
a
I strength. and ·constWution shaff b~ •as may be prescrihed

B
H~irPaccordan6&wiUi "the'Yorcfers o(the' Gbverrim'ent'.iss'Lied
tcYih(this.betialf(froriftime:tc:nlrne:'i: ;;;rH '~' ' 1W')rlc ··: ~ tf·'·
.
,..

b'4.\J;E:J'-
7. POWERS OF APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION -
~,) Q""t~~··r..1._.I --cJl
•
(1) The powers to appoint and promote an Inspector,· Stib-
lnspector and otber subordinate of 1the force .sha~l .vest.in
c ,, : ;ffre'. c'6'mtfH~s1oh&Pt>t ;c'i(/)=>mice,· J1.yd-e'r'a'bad .~the
··,G·~~~rn~~~~t~SJ1~i ~~y~~·ll1~,1~9W.~~f '.!?~ a§P;~i~t>li,~~ ~P~~p~ty
cc·omm1ss1oner and, Assistant Comm1ss1oner o ,Police.
::u_~jl,£·,··.!\,_;\ J\.Jf~ ~'. '~-j,_,;:lt • i.-H"- - .

(2) Powers of dismissal, discharge,. ·1~
,demotion,
~t~A~tl-JM

D suspension, fine and punishment.- The (Commissioner
1}'?f:.£it,¥J~91i~~ 1 ljYsJ~ra.~a.d).;:r12~Y.; ._~uqj~pHo, such su les.and
r,~gyl13,yqn,~ . ·_as.,: ~p~ 1 ~gxerrinie;n.tt IJ!aY1:·ffcom Jime ·to'!time,
:..1

tP~9_r:nylg~te 1 i[l t~l~ b.epalf,: ~~~,~pt ~P~puty. ,Commissioner
and Assistant Commissioner of Police-
E (a)dismiss, discharge, demote, suspend or fine to
1(•- : •, ~xteAt ofihalf the'salafy,·any<member of the Police
,":::, f.ori:e ':when'arry' member-rM ithe,'.-force ·comniits,
neglects or fails to perform duties or contravenes
; :: , j ·'··th%!· 'pr6visrons·· ofth(~ ·AcT 8r')bf fr1:~? rtf~~: ,;,~a~
_ . • ·\ .... ,, t1-.. h-) t ·-1
1
t,t~\ -~,:.-.:·v-;;; .. ~ l'1r'~:- !JL\ t)b·l.:'. 1r.~ , • . J··
'"'it::.
.
F ' · - th_.ereunder· or :~omm1ts ,9fqSs,m,1sc9,n,d.,l;l,c,t qu,n~.9, .
.,,;--l;·-1e~ve::·~.'~E! n-~:;\~ ,· ; ~)~;~1:1\: .<rr:•··'l~""_, ,.. )
(b)imp~se the pun~shment of alt1rd~pg~,b~~tf9J!?r
Station for a penod not exceeding three Clays upon
G I
a 111e11.oer of the force
.·••"d.H
_:,:,:, -· ,;i; f 1
,inferior.Jn1rank. to. thaf,of-a
.\i;·,,,(..,
1.~: ··)!! .:,.• ..-!~' k'") •"11,J!.,,>_• ~·· · ·' '·'",

1· . ~: • • ~~~FR) qof ~ta~1~ 1 W.h8. !~·j9.i.~.4?rr~~n-~~ ~on}rnits..,"
-~~~" ~:·· ~. ~~s~c -~ri~~Qi,8.~(/9~;h;~'{ff.~if;·ifls~q)ently . ~De!
c-- • . ':'n~u_bo~dJna~ely. - --~~,,,::,.:o ··:· J' .. ·":.: .._·, .r:; ; · · .-·
,j..._''; '' '. . ..... . ·. . '< - ~

•"'(3) ... ::Nothing confairied·in 's9~~~qti.dn (2):~ha'.lleffect ~hy
H , ·- ._ ·criminal· proc~edlng 6y .{\;hich' ari cfir!i;H~1 li~bility
i . t·~ . •. . .~ '-·~~], - . - f.,J,
P.V. RADHA
. '
KRISHNA. AND ORS.
- . ..-
v. . STATE
1
OF,A.P. 197,
,_
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]

or charge is ~stablishe,d for ~n offens~ against any A
Police Officer." ,· , ., - '

The 1985 Act · ' ) -

:;1.1

"2(b) 'police force' means the police force constituted
under the·Hyderab'ad City Police Act, 1348F.~ the .Andhra 8 ~:i
pradesh ·(Andhra Area)' District _Police Act; '1859 and the 1 ,
·Andhra P.radesh (Telangaria_Area) District Police Ad,::-~:
1329 F, or any other law relating to ..police force. "' 1 · · " -.
, '. I . • "'~ . • . .• I ' ' - I p.,,.... ,.. '· • : ·:; I

(c) 'prescribed' means prescribed by rules made under C
. this Act.

3. Regu[ation of transfer of members of police"torce:- (1)
Notwit~standing anything in any la\fv'. for time being in force,
. a member of the police force shall be liable to serve in any D
. _p_artofLthe St~te of Andhr~ ~ra~e~h'. 'y ·'.
• - ' I I : ~..J t· ~

(2) The Government may mak.e r\1les for the regulation of
transfer of members of police force from one part of the
State to anothe·r part within the State of Andhra Pradesh
by such authority as may be prescribed. E

4. Power to make rules:- (1) The Government may, by
.notifi_cation in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette, make rules to
.... .~arry out the purposes of this Act.

:. (2) Every rule made under this Act shall, immediately after F
it, is made, be laid before each House of the State
Legislature if it is in session and if it is not in session
immediately following for a total period of fourteen days
'which may be comprised in one session or in two
successive sessions, and if, before the expiration of the G
session in which it is so laid or the session immediately
following both Houses agree in making any modification
in the rule or in the annulment of the rule, the rule shall from
the date on which the modification or annulment is notified
in the Andhra Pradesh Gazette, have effect only in such H
198 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A modified form or shall stand annulled, as the case may be;
..+
so however, that any such modification or annulment shall .
be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously
done under that rule."

10. Before enactment of the 1985 Act, the Governor of the ,.
B '
State had, in exercise of the powers conferred upon him by
Sections 8 and 1O of the Madras District Police Act, 1859,
Section 6 of the Hyderabad District Police Act 1329 Fasli and
Section 7 of the Hyderabad Act read with proviso to Article 309 L
of the Constitution of India made the Special Rules for Andhra
c Pradesh Police Subordinate Service. These rules were
published by G.O. Ms. No.1263, G.A. (Rules) Dept., dated
26.8.1959. In exercise of the powers conferred upon it under
Section 3(2) of the 1985 Act, the State Government framed
rules for regulating transfer of the members of the police force. .....
D Those rules were circulated by G.O.Ms. No.288 Home (Police- ¥
C) Department dated 6.5.1986. In 1999, the Governor framed
another set of SpeciC:tl Rules for A.P. Police (Civil) Subordinate
Services. The same were issued vide G.O. Ms. No.374 Home
(Police. C) dated 14.12.1999.
E
Pre-Presidential Order Litigation

11. Shri D. Ram Reddy and Shri T. Ram Reddy, who were
recruited as Head Constable and Constable respectively in the ·~

Hyderabad City Police filed Writ Petition No.1643/1973
F questioning their transfers to Khammam and Nalgonda districts
respectively by the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad on the
ground that being members of Hyderabad City Police force,
they could not be transferred outside the twin cities of
Hyderabad and Secunderabad. The Inspector General of
G Police, Andhra Pradesh and Commissioner of Police,
Hyderabad, who were impleaded as respondents opposed the .:....
prayers of the petitioners by contending that the petitioners are
governed by the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Police
Subordinate Rules and, as such, they are liable to be
H transferred and posted anywhere in the State of Andhra
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 199
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
Pradesh. The learned Single Judge referred to the provisions A
-4:• of Article 309 of the Constitution, the Andhra Pradesh
(Telangana Area) District Police Act 1329 (Fasli), which was
extended to whole of the Telangana area except the city of
Hyderabad, Section 7 of the Hyderabad Act and held that in
view of the provisions contained in the latter enactment, the B
rules framed under proviso to Article 309, insofar as the same
affected the conditions of service of the Police Officers
appointed in Hyderabad City Police are ineffective .
...
-~ Accordingly, transfer of the writ petitioner outside the limits of
twin city was declared illegal and quashed. c
12. The respondents in the writ petition challenged the
order of the learned Single Judge in Writ Appeal No.89011975.
The Division Bench referred to the Presidential Order and held:

"The Hyderabad City Police force comes under Article D
.. '{
371-D of the Constitution which is a special provision
made for the state of Andhra Pradesh. Under Article 371-
D with respect to the State of Andhra Pradesh, the
President of India issued some rules as to the
requirements of the State as a whole, for equitable E
opportunities and facilities for the people belonging to
different parts of the State, in the matter of public
employment and in the matter of education and different
f provisions for various parts of the State. Clause 10 of
Article 371-D states that the provisions of this Article and F
of any order made by the President thereunder shall have
effect not with standing anything in any other provision of
the Constitution or in any other law for the time being in
force. Therefore special provisions have been made in the
case of Andhra Pradesh State in regard to public
G
employment organisation of local cadres and regulation of
direct recruitment. That order stipulating the above
provisions, will take precedence over the provisions of
Articles 309 and 313 of the Constitution. The Presidential
Order which we have referred to above in clause (5)
H
2G10., f SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
~

A,: :'~provides for local cadres and transfer of persons. Clause
(1) of Section 5 states that for each part of the state, for ,,:..
which a local cadre has been organized in respect of any
category of posts, shall be a separate unit for purposes
of recruitment, appointment, discharge, seniority,
B promotion and transfer and such other matters as may be
specified by the State Government, in respect of that
category of posts. Sub-clause 2 of Section 5 states that
nothing in this order shall prevent the state Government
from making provision for the transfer of person from any •
4.

c local cadre to any office or establishment to which this
order does not apply or vice-versa. Clause 14 of the order
mentions special saving provisions and under Sub-Clause
(f) of clause 14 any post of police officer as defined in
clause (b) of section 3 of the Hyderabad City Police Act
D
1348 F is excluded. .
¥ t
In view of the provisions of clause 14(f), it is obvious that
it is not open to tt:e State Government to make rules
providing transfer of persons from Hyderabad City Police
Force to any other area or any other police force. On this
E ground alone the impugned order must be set aside
apart from the ground which appealed to our brother
Muktadar, J."
~)
(emphasis supplied)
F Post-Presidential Order Litigation

13. Twenty two Sub-Inspectors of Hyderabad City Police
challenged the transfers of 89 Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors
of different districts to the City of Hyderabad by filing an ~

G application before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal
(for short 'the Tribunal'), which was registered as R.P. No.1220/
_)...
1977. The Tribunal relied upon the orders passed by the learned
Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court in Writ
Petition No.1643/1973 and Writ Appeal No.890/1975
H respectively, referred to the provisions of the Hyderabad Act
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND 'ORS.' v. STATE OF kP. ·201
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
and quashed the transfers of the officers belonging to different :A
districts to the Hyderabad City Police with ~ direction that they
be sent back to their respective districts and the consequential
1

vacancies be filled from theofficers onhe'Cfiy.Police{·"
I ... •• l < ' .,.:1 l~"'.'-:......., ·~ ' 1 ;;i; ~i
14. Anoth_er bat9~ ~f cas~~,was .!iled}5y-t~~ m,~~~~rs of ,8
the Hyderabad City Police·oefore'the Tribunal.questioning the
validity of the 1985 Acf ~hd transfer of the' Pblice;bfficers' from
other zonal cadre·s1to ·Hyderabad City.POiicef;jrhe same'were
• ' 0 • ~-.. .-~ 1 { ·""' • • T - ,. ! ... ~ •" • \ ' ~

rf'gistered as O.A. Nos;22622-22635/1990, 'RP: Nos.22126-
22130/1989, 47611198~._ 4B78/1?8~~:,4gf9!1~~8}h?·~1s67/ :c
1989. The Full Bench of the Tribunal made a reference to the
orders passed 'by the learned Single Jud°ge in'\lv.P'. NoJ643/
1973 and by the Division Bench in Writ Ap.peaf No.890/1975
as also order dated 18.7.1988 passed by ,thel;,,Tribunal
I . . ; . : l.
~.P.
in" .........
. ' J 1J ~ ~ ~ I

No.1220/1977 and observed that the 1985-Act ·was passed to
overcome the orders passed by the High ·c'burt' a-na'Trib~h~( D
The Full Bench of the Tribunal· then noted that.rules for regulating
transfer of members of police force from one part of the State
to another were framed by the government in exercise .. of
powers under paragraph 5(2).of the,Presidential Order .read
with Sections 3(2) and 4(1) oMhe ·1985·Act and also that.by E
the time the 1985 Act and rules were framed;:government had
made several provisions with reference to ·paragraph .5(2) of
f the Presidential Order and recorded the. following ,conclusions:

(a) The Act and Rules do not violate P~~~idential Qrd~~ i~ F
so far as a transfer is from a post saved under para.14 of
the Presidential Order to another post ls,a~ed, ~~d~.~-,par~
14 of a person not included in any local cadre,under the
Presidential Order. · . ., . " , ~· ·

(b) The impugned Act and the Rules are not effective for G
making transfer in respect of local cadres i.e. either inter-
cadre or from or to posts in the cadre to and from posts
saved under para 14 of the Presidential Order, and for
which provision is to be made by the Government in
various clauses of 5(2) or of persons included in any local · H
202 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A cadre under Presidential Order. ,.,....
\

(c) It is open for the Government to make any further or
other provision as contemplated by 5(2).

It is made clear that we have examined the question of
8 transfer from the city police to another local cadre on a
permanent basis. We have not examined transfers of
police officers bonafide in public interest in exigencies of
services for short periods without affecting their +
~

continuance and position in their local cadre or effecting
c their seniority in the local cadre to which they are now
transferred for leveled by the Head of Department viz.,
DGP of Police.

Recruitment of the a(;!Qellants and (;!articulars of some
D other advertisements

15. The appellants were appointed as Sub-Inspectors of
Police in Hyderabad City. Their selection was preceded by an
advertisement issued by the Public Service Commission for
recruitment to various posts including Sub-Inspectors of Police.
E Out of 143 posts of Sub-Inspectors of Police, 93 were
earmarked for Hyderabad City, which was described as Zone
VII. Thirteen vacancies were reserved to be filled in by transfer
from police ministerial staff. In that category also nine vacancies
were shown for Zone VII. In the same advertisement, the posts
F of Assistant Commercial Tax Officers were shown for
Hyderabad I (2) and Hyderabad II (4) falling in Zone VI. The
advertisement also specified the area of Hyderabad City (Zone
VII) as comprising the following:

G (a) Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Area -

(i) Hyderabad Division

(ii) Secunderabad Division

H (b) Secunderabad Cantonment Area
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 203
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
(c) Usmania University Campus A

(d) Zamastanpur village Panchayat Area

(e) Fatehnagar Panchayat Area

(f) Bowenpalle Panchayat Area 8
(g) Machabolaram Panchayat Area

..
•
(h) Lalgura village Panchayat Area

(i) Malkagiri Panchayat Area c
G) Uppalkalasa Panchayat Area

(k) Alwal Panchayat Area

(I) Alanagar Panchayat Area D
"'-
(m) Moosapet Panchayat Area

(n) Kukatpalle Panchayat Area

16. After completion of the process of selection, the E
Secretary of the Commission issued Memos dated 29.5.1985
whereby the appellants were informed about their selection and
allotment to Zone VII i.e., Hyderabad City. For the sake of
• reference, memo issued to one of the appellants is reproduced
below:- F

'.t "ANDH-RA PRADESH PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION

MEMO N0.23490/JB/85 dated 29.5.1985
G
Sub. Recruitment (Direct) Group II - Andhra Pradesh
~ Services 1983-84 - Allotment of
~ selected candidates to / the Department - Intimation
to the selected candidates - Reg.
H
'.:!~b4 (SbPREME'.cdURT "REPORTS t2oo~] .15. .(ADDL) 's.C.R. I
'
-
..,
. - .
'
..
'
!
' .
-
'
.,; ~-

·,, ~ .

A Ref. His application.'

f: "\ •' .I , .I t· ·~..i ) _c . • _ , '""! • 'j .
Sri Pantala VeQkata Radha Krishna is informed that
on the basis of tpe resu!ts ~f the competitive examination
and oral test conducted by the Commission for recruitment
to posts included 'in, Group II Andhra Praaesh Services
1983-84 he/she _has been s~lected
1·+,,.,... ...... : .
--·~···
and allotted
: r··as Sub ~ r~,,~

Inspector of Police '(<:;ivil) in Zone VII HYderabad City.

"The selection is subject 'io 'th1e results of 'the Writ
Appeal regarding. wejghtage
' r . ,._ . •·
marks to .Telugu
·, ; ' . ii_,
~
Medium ~ ~

candidates pending before the Supreme Court." '
•• '• 1-• ""''

He may await communication from the Unit Officer
i.e. Director GeneraLof Police, A.P.r·Hyderabad ..

._: .1•... • ·,.. Sd/-

·' ·.c,Sd/"' Abdul Kareem Khan, IAS,
Secretary
', ' . r . .. . ;~ t'

i I. ~ •: .'t ;':J''~~!·· ,•

Asst. s~~retary
-- ,_ I. ~ ' • - '
. - ~ I

·-~

F Sri Pantala Venkata Radha Krishna
.....
~-~--~;\.~~,,_,.. '\',

'"

11:Therealteh·the Commissioner of Pdice in exercise of
.G the po"Yer ve\5ted in him under Rule.2(a) and Annexure-1 of the .;
:~fpef2la·11 Ffu(~¥ 1 tof'ttje ·Andhra i Pr~desh · suhordina_te Service
is·~u-e d' :dfdE:Ns tort appbintr:nent, of the appella_nts ·a~ Sub-
1
.....•'· , ~ , ("J,. o ' ( ' ~·'t ~ •·.
lnspectbrs of Police'. 'Fodne sake of reference,~the ·order of
t''- - , , o .. • • I , • . ,

appointment of one of':the appMl~nts,' namely, P.V: Radha
, H Krishna, is reproduced below:
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 205
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
"GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH: A
Office of the
Commissioner of Police.
Hyderabad-A. P.
Dated 9th Sept. 1985
8
D.O. No. 3817
No. L&O/E2/3723/85
~' 0 RD ER:

Sub: Police - Sub-Inspectors (Civil) -Appointment of - C
Orders - Regarding.

In exercise of the powers vested in me under Rule
2(a) and Annexure - I of the Special Rules for the Andhra D
Pradesh Police Subordinate Service Sri Patnala Venkata
Radha Krishna s/o. Patnala Narayana Rao is appointed
on probation as Sub-Inspector of Police (Civil) in the time
scale of pay of Rs.575-20-775-25-950 sub~ct to the
condition that his services are liable to be terminated at E
any time before the declaration of his probation under
General Rule 24(a) or 25(c) of the Andhra Pradesh State
~. and Subordinate Service Rules with one month's notice or
with one month's pay in lieu thereof. He will be on probation
from the date of joining the Police Training College for a F
continuous period of 2 years and 7 months on duty or a
total period of 3-'years on duty. He will be governed by the
provisions of the Special Rules for the Andhra Pradesh
Police Subordinate Service.

He will under go a course of training for a period of· G
one year in the Police Training College, Anantapur followed
by practical training for one year and 7 months including
independent charge of a Police Station, for not less than
one year. During the period of training he will be pa_id the
minimum of the time scale of pay i.e., Rs.575-00 p.m. plus H
206 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A the allowances admissible thereon.
.)}..
The tre1ining will commence from 12.9.1985 at the
Police Training College, Anantpur. He should deposit a
sum of Rs.300-00 (Rupees three hundred only) at the time
of joining the Training College towards Mess and Uniform
B
charges and execute a bond of security.

He is informed that if his mother tongue is·not Telugu
or if he has not taken Telugu as Second Language in SSC ~
or equivalent examination or any higher examination he
c shall qualify himself by passing the Second Class
Language test in Telugu conducted by the Andhra Pradesh
Public Service Commission."

18. In 1991, advertisement Rc.No.419/R&T Admn 1/90
D dated 14.2.1991 was issued for recruitment of Civil Sub-
Inspectors (Man) and Reserve Sub-Inspectors (Man) in different
zones which were identified with the respective ranges. In that
advertisement, 80 vacancies of Civil Sub-Inspector (Man) and
26 vacancies of Reserve Sub-Inspector (Man) were shown as
earmarked for Hyderabad City Police Range, which was also
E
described as Zone VII (free zone). In 1994 also, an
advertisement was issued for recruitment of 435 Sub-lrispecfors
Civil/Intelligence (Man). In that advertisement 74 vacancies.were
showri as earmarked for Zone VII i.e., Hyderabad City (free ,\
zone). Similar advertisements were issued after 1975 for
F recruitment to various posts enumerated in paragraph 14(f) of
the Presidential Order.

Genesis of the present litigation

G 19. In view of order dated 20.10.1984 passP.d by the
Tribunal in O.A. Nos.22622-22635/1990 and connected
matters, the State Government issued G.O. Ms. No.349 Home ~

(Police. C) Department dated 15.12.1997 whereby the private
respondents who were then working as Inspectors of Police in
Hyderabad City Police (City Range), were transferred back/
H
_, P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF AP.
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
207

repatriated to their parent cadres in other police ranges A
.;{~
specified in G.O. Ms. No.1697, Home dated 10.12.1975 and
G.O. Ms. No. 795 dated 30.6.1976. The private respondents
challenged G.O. Ms. No.349 in O.A. Nos.7579/1998, 8430/
1998, 8431/1998, 8534/1998, 58/2001 and 2139/2001. They
pleaded that their transfer to Hyderabad City Police had been B
effected in accordance with the provisions of the 1985 Act and
rules framed there under and in public interest and the
Government's action to transfer them back to the ranges in
.
-I which they were initially appointed is ex facie illegal, arbitrary
and unjustified. They further pleaded that the order passed by c
the Full Bench of the Tribunal cannot be invoked for effecting
their repatriation to the parent cadres because they were not
parties in O.A. Nos.22622-22635/1990 and connected matters.
Another plea taken by the private respondents was that the
impugned G.O. is liable to be declared arbitrary and
D
+ discriminatory because while some of those who were
transferred to Hyderabad City Police have been repatriated,
others have been retained.

20. In the counter affidavits filed on behalf of the official
respondents before the Tribunal, it was specifically averred that E
the applicants in O.As. were appointed in districts other than
Hyderabad City Police and were promoted as Inspectors in
1
their respective parent units as per seniority in their respective.
ranges and they cannot claim continuance in Hyderabad City
Police. It was then pleaded that the applicants were transferred F
to Hyderabad City Police by the Director General and Inspector
General of Police, Andhra Pradesh in exercise of the powers
conferred upon him by G.O. No.288 dated 6.5.1986 but their
seniority is being maintained in their respective police ranges
and none has been assigned seniority in Hyderabad City G
Police. According to the official respondents, the 1985 Act and
..... the rules framed there under are not effective for making
transfer in respect of local cadres i.e., either inter cadre or from
or to posts in the cadre to and from posts in paragraph 14 of
the Presidential Order for which provision is to be made by the H

,
208 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A Government in terms of various clauses of paragraph 5(2). The
relevant portions of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the
State Government in 0.A. No.7579/1998 - Sardar Harihar
Singh and three others v. State of A.P. and others, are
extracted below:-
B
"It is further submitted that the applicants in the OA were
· transferred to Hyderabad City Police by the 3rd respondent
in exercise of the powers conferred on him in G.O. Ms.
No.288 dated 6.5.1986 on different dates. The senion1y
of the above applicants is being maintained in their
c respective police ranges only. None of the applicants
were assigned seniority in Hyderabad City Police. All of
them were promoted as Inspectors of Police in their
respective parent units as per their tum in seniority.

D In reply to para 6(0) it is submitted that the contention
of the applicants that Hyderabad City Police is not a
separate zone is incorrect and baseless. It is fact that the
entire AP has been divided into six zones and Hyderabad
City Police has been treated as "Free Zone". The
E Hyderabad City Police being Free Zone has got
separate entity as like other zones. The vacancies in
respect of posts of Hyder~bad City Police are notified
separately and selection/appointment to the post of Sub-
Inspectors of Police, Civil and Reserve Sub-Inspectors
F of Police, CAR and Police constables of both Civil and
CAR to the extent of vacancies are conducted by this unit
only and appointment orders to the candidates so
selected after completion of recruitment process wor': co
the said posts such as physical efficiencv test, one star
test, three star test and also written examination to the
G
candidates are conducted by this unit only
independently. The same process if followed in respect
of posts of other six zones separately by each zone. Thus
all the six zones and Hyderabad City Police are separate
units for ail service matters of appointment, promotion to
H

_,
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF AP. 209
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]

the next rank etc. The Hyderabad City Police is not a part A
~
and parcel of Zone Six as contended by the applicants."

(emphasis supplied)

..\ 21. After taking note of the respective pleadings, the
Tribunal dismissed the O.As. The argument of the applicants 8
that Hyderabad City Police is part and parcel of Zone VI was
rejected by the Tribunal in the following words:
-t "There is no separate zones for Hyderabad city. It is thus
·.
a free zone. It thus follows that the Hyderabad City Police c
Unit is a free zone. Separate and independent recruitment
is being made in res~ of post of Hyderabad city police:
In short, Hyderabad city-police is being treated as a free
zone where there is independent recruitment. n
D
l 22. The private respondents challenged the order of the
Tribunal by filing different writ petitions which were heard and
disposed of by the Full Bench of the High Court. The Full Bench
observed that the provisions of the 1985 Act will have to be
construed in harmony with the provisions of the Presidential
Order which prevail over any other provisions of the Constitution E
or any other law for the time being in force. The Full Bench then
referred to various paragraphs of the Presidential Order and
,I. observed:

"In construing the power granted to the State Government F
under para 5(2) for making provision for transfers of
persons, we must not loose sight of the historical
compulsions which have led to the enactment of the
Presidential Order, which is buttressed by the over riding
effect given to the provisions of the Presidential Order not G
only against the exercise of the majoritarian, political and
-j._ executive choices of the State, but is also made operative
against any other provisions of the Constitution of India
(Art.371D(10) read with para 11 of the Presidential Order)."
H
210 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADOL.) S.C.R.
"-
"
A 23. The Full Bench then delved into the grounds on which A
power under paragraph 5 of the Presidential Order could be
exercised and observed:

"Having regard to the provisions of para 14 of the I
Presidential Order, no limitations are prescribed on the '
B
power of the State Government to provide for transfer of
the incumbent of a post in any department, institution or
establishment enumerated in para 14 to another such ~
,._
department, institution or establishment. .,
c Insofar as transfers of persons falling within the ambit of
para 5(2)(a) to (c) is concerned, provisions of the Act 1985
and the rules thereunder set out in G.0.Ms. No.288 dated
6.5.1986, must be construed as enabling such transfers
only when no qualified or suitable person is available in a
D particular local cadre or where such transfer is otherwise ~

considered necessary in the public interest and for no other
reason. Normally such transfers must necessarily be of
limited duration or tenure to meet the specified exigency
namely either during the period no qualified or suitable
E person is available or the public interest that necessitated
such transfer, continues. Immediately on cessation of such
circumstances - as and when a qualified or suitable
person is available or when the public interest concerned ,I
ceases to operate, the person so transferred in the above
, F exigencies must need be repatriated to the local cadre to
· which he belongs either by allotment or direct recruitment
to it. There may be very rare circumstances, and very rare
...
they mu$t necessarily be, where a person is required to '
be transferred to another local cadre on a longer term
basis. Clear reasons for such long term transfer must not
G
only exist but must be clearly recorded. In any case
~
wherever such transfer, be it for a short term or longer term,
the transfers made in the circumstances set out in para
5(2)(a) to (c) being on administrative exigencies, must
enable person so transferred to carry the benefit of his
H
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 211
AND ORS. [GS. SINGHVI, J.]
seniority to the transferred local cadre. To this extent Rule A
~ 3 of the Rules made under the Act 1985 must be held to
be valid.

In the case of a transfer on reciprocal basis,· para
5(2)(d) itself mandates that the person transferred shall be
assigned seniority in the later cadre with effect from the
B
date of his transfer to such cadre. Rule 3 of the Rules made
under the Act 1985 would have no application in such a
) case and the provisions of para 5(2)(d) would operate. We
~
are of the opinion that even in respect of a transfer under
para 5(2)(d) the principles/guidelines for allotment in para c
4(2) should be borne in mind and reciprocal transfers
should not be freely approved which would gravely disrupt
the need for composition of balance cadre having regard
to age and seniority or the administrative needs of the
posts in the local cadre. D

24. On the question whether there is a separate cadre for
Hyderabad City Police or the same falls in Zone-VI which
includes District of Hyderabad, the Full Bench observed as
under: E
"Nothing has been placed before this court to demonstrate
that any appointment of police officers have been made
only under the provisions of either the. Hyderabad City
Police Act 1348 Fasli but they have been made also under
the Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) District Police Act F
1859 or the Andhra Pradesh (Telengana Area) District
Police Act 1349 Fasli. All appointments have been made
under the relevant Rules made under provision to Art. 309
of the Constitution including the Andhra Pradesh Police
Service Rules; Andhra Pradesh Police Subordinate G
Service Rules; Andhra Pradesh Police (Armed Reserve)
Service Rules; Andhra Pradesh (Communications)
Subordinate Service Rules; Andhra Pradesh Police
(Computer Centre) Service Rules and the Andhra Pradesh
Police (Computer Centre) Subordinate Service Rules, etc. H
212 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A Sec 3(b) of Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 f.asli
defines a Police Officer to include.every member of the -~
City Police Force appointed under this Act as also the
Commissioner of City Police, Hyderabad, the Deputy or
Assistant Commissioner of PQlice and subject to
B provisions of sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 9 and sub-sec.(2) of Sec.
10 every person who has been appointed as an Additional
or Special Police Officer. Sec. 7 of this Act vests in the
Commissioner of City Police the power to appoint' and
promote Inspector of Police, Sub Inspector of Police and ~-
other subordinates of the force and empowers the
c Government to appoint the Deputy Commissioner and
Assistant Commissioner of Police. Sections 9 and 10
provide the power to appoint Additional Police Officer and
Special Police respectively. No Police Officer has been
appointed under the provisions of this Act. All recruitments
D are notified and appointment made under the Special
Rules made under the provision to Art 309 of the
Constitution. Thus, though the post of a Police Officer as
defined in Sec. 3(b) of the Hyderabad City Police Act
1348 Fasli is beyond the purview of the Presidential Order
E in view of para 14 of the said Order, there is in fact no
Police Officer as defined in Sec. 3(b) of the Hyderabad
City Police Act 1348 Fasli, factually in existence.

As there has been no constitution of a separate- )

F cadre for the city of Hyderabad for members of the Police
Force in terms of para 3(6) of the Presidential Order,
members of the police force allotted or recruited to
Hyderabad 1nust be construed as having been so allotted
or. recruited to either the District cadre of Hyderabad or
zonal cadr~ of Zone VI viz Hyderabad, Nizamabad,
G
Mahabubnagar, Medak and Nalgonda Districts, as the
case may be, depending upon the rank they hold, whether
it is a District cadre post or a Zonal cadre post.

The post of an Inspector of Police in the Police
H
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 213
"' AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
department having been specified as item 51 of the 3rd A
~ Schedule and being a specified gazetted category in terms
of para 2(1)0) read with 3(4) of the Presidential Order and
being required therefore, to be organized into a zonal
----t
cadre of Inspector of Police including those working for the
...... /
since as pait of the Hyderabad city police, have to be B
considered as members of Zone VI which includes the
District of Hyderabad. They do not fall within the provisions
of para 14 of the Presidential Order. The transfers from
._
....,. 4 and to the establishments and units of Hyderabad City
Police therefore fall within the parameters of para 5(2)(c) c
to (d). A person once allotted to one zone and attached to
his post must be said to be belonging to the same zone
and he has no right to come to any other cadre, which is
not organized one.
~

(
We may notice that no separate organization has D
-~
come into being in terms of para 3(1) of the Presidenti~I ·
Order. Para 3(3) of the said order refers-to the zonal posts.
.... Para 3(5) apply to both gazetted and non-gazetted posts .
Although a power has been conferred in Para 3(6) to create
a separate cadre of posts which has to be organized for E
the city of Hyderabad, no such cadre has come into being.
Further, in terms of notification for the purpose of
organization of a separate cadre for the city of Hyderabad.
4
Para 3(5) will have application only in relation to the said
local cadres, which have been organized in respect of any F
'
-<" - category of posts. Such local cadre would be a separate
unit inter alia for the purposes of recruitment, appointment,
discharge; seniority, promotion and transfer.............
'."-.. In terms of the II Schedule there are only six zones.
G
The city of Hyderabad comes within the purview of Zone
VI. The city of Hyderabad, although loosely treated as a
+
separate zone, but no such separate zone has been
created. The city of Hyderabad therefore comes within the
purview of Zone VI only."
H
214 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A 25. The Full Bench then recorded 13 conclusions including
):
the following, which are under challenge in these appeals:

"(b) No separate cadre has been organised for the City
~

B
(c)
of Hyderabad within the meaning of para 3(6) of the
Presidential Order.

No recruitment to the post of a police officer as
--
defined in Sec. 3(b) of Hyderabad City. Police Act
1348 Fasli has been made and there is thus J
t ;-..
factually no incumbent of the post of police officer
c under para 14(f) of the Presidential Order.

(d) Inspectors of Police working in the Hyderabad City
Police establishments either on promotion to that
post or by direct recruitment, must be considered
D as belonging to Zone VI in the zonal cadre."
-I·
26. Shri L. Nageshwar Rao, learned senior counsel
appearing for the appellants referred to clause (10) of Article
3710, paragraph 11 of the Presidential Order and order passed
by the Division Bench of the High Court in Writ Appeal No.890/
E 1975 and argued that when the Parliament has unequivocally
recognized the primacy of the provisions contained in the
Presidential Order, exclusion clause contained in paragraph
14(f) thereof is required to be given full effect and the Full Bench ~
committed serious error by indirectly bringing the post of Police
F Officer as defined in Section 3(b) of the Hyderabad Act in the
.· scheme of localization/zonalisation of cadres. Learned senior
- .
counsel emphasized that the appellants were recruited as Sub-
Inspectors for Hyderabad City Police which does not fall in any
of the zones carved out for localization of different cadres and ....
G argued that the Full Bench erred in holding that no separate
cadre was constituted for Hyderabad City Police. Shri
Nageshwar Rao made a pointed reference to G.D. Ms. No.795 +
dated 30.6.1976 to show that in the scheme of organization of
local cadres for non-gazetted posts of the police department,
H
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 215
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
it was specifically mentioned that any post of Police Officer as A
f...
defined in Section 3(b) of the Hyderabad Act is outside the
purview of the Presidential Order and the same shall apply to
remaining offices of the police department mentioned in
paragraph 4. Learned counsel then submitted that even while
~·
forming new police ranges vide G.O. Ms. No.1697 Home dated B
10.12.1975, a separate range i.e., City Range was carved out
for Hyderabad, Secunderabad and other areas mentioned in
; First Schedule to the Presidential Order and argued that by
" F declaring that members of police force allotted or recruited to
Hyderabad must be construed as having been so allotted or c
recruited to either the district cadre of Hyderabad or zonal
cadre of Zone VI i.e., Hyderabad, Nizamabda, Mahabubnagar,
Medak and Nalgonda districts, the Full Bench has virtually
negated the exclusion clause contained in paragraph 14(f) of
the Presidential Order and, at the same time, made the creation
D
of City Range redundant. Learned senior counsel argued that
in view of the exclusion clause contained in paragraph 14(f) of
the Presidential Order, the posts of Constable, Head
Constable, Sub-Inspector and Inspector of Hyderabad City
Police are not covered by the scheme of localization/
zonalisation and the same cannot be treated as part of Zone E
VI as has been done by the Full Bench of the High Court. Shri
Nageshwar Rao submitted that not only the post of Police
Officer as defined in Section 3(b) of the Hyderabad Act but
various other posts in the Secretariat of the State Government,
in the offices of Heads of Department, Special Office or F
Establishment etc. are excluded from the purview of the
Presidential Order and till the pronouncement of the Full Bench,
recruitment to all the posts enumerated in paragraph 14(f) of
,-::,.
the Presidential Order was being made without any preference
being given to local candidates. He also referred to the counter G
affidavits filed on behalf of the State Government and
+
Commissioner of Police in the O.As. filed· by the private
respondents to show that it has been the consistent stand of
the official respondents that Hyd~rabad City Police has been
treated as free zone and the vacancies in respect of posts of H
216 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.
I

A Hyderabad City Police are notified separately and selection to
various cadres are being conducted for appointment for .,\
Hyderabad City Police only.

27. Shri Anoop G. Choudhari, learned senior counsel
B
appearing for the State submitted that even though in terms of
Section 7 of the Hyderabad Act, the power to appoint an
·•
Inspector, Sub-Inspector and other subordinate of the force
vested in the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, after framing
of Special Rules for Police Subordinate Service, the said }-
'
power can be exercised by other designated authorities and, "
c therefore, those appointed on subordinate posts in Hyderabad
City Police cannot be treated as part of separate cadre. Shri
Choudhari further submitted that the exclusion clause contained
in paragraph 14(f) could operate only if a separate cadre had
been carved out for Hyderabad City and submitted that in the
D absence of any recruitment having been made for Hyderabad
-t-
City Police, the Full Bench rightly treated the Inspectors of
Police working in Hyderabad City Police establishment. as
belonging to Zone VI In the zonal cadre

E 28. We have given serious thought to the entire matter. It
is not in dispute that the Presidential· Order was issued for
providing equitable opportunities and facilities for the people
belonging to different parts of the State in the matters of public
employment and education and by virtue of clause (10) of Article J

F 371 D, overriding effect has been given to the Presidential Order
qua other constitutional and statutory provisions. For achieving
the objective set out in clause (1) of Article 371 D, provisions
have been made in the Presidential Order for localization/
zonalization of cadres and giving preference to the candidates
~
belonging to the particular local area. Paragraph 3 of the
G
Presidel'}tial Order postulates organization of local cadres for
different. posts. Paragraph 5(1) thereof declares that each part
of the State, for which a local cadre has been organized in
+
respect of any category of posts, shall be a separate unit for
purposes of recruitment, appointment, discharge, seniority,
H
• P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 217
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
A
promotion, transfer and other matters, as may be specified by
+.. the Government in respect of that category of posts. Paragraph
5(2) empowers the State Government to make provision for
transfer of employees in different contingencies. Paragraph
6(1) defines local areas. Paragraph,6(2) lays down that each
* zone shall be regarded as local area for specified purposes.
However, two exceptions have been carved out in the
8

Presidential Order in respect of certain categories of posts for
the City of Hyderabad. One such exception is discernible from
)
the language of paragraphs 3(6) and 6(3). In terms of sub-
paragraph (6) of paragraph 3, the Central Government is c
empowered to notify the departments in which and categories
of posts for which a separate cadre is required to be
recognized for the City of Hyderabad. This sub-paragraph also
lays down that on such notification being issued the post
belonging to each such category and in each such department D
4--
in the City of Hyderabad (other than those concerned with the
administration of areas falling outside the said City) shall be
organized into a separate cadre and the posts so organized
shall be excluded from other cadres. In terms of paragraph 6
of the Presidential Order, each district and each zone is
E
regarded as local area but by virtue of sub-paragraph (3)
thereof, the City of Hyderabad is regarded as a local area for
direct recruitment to posts in any cadre under the State
1 Government comprising all or any of the posts in the said city,
in the departments and belonging to the categories notified
under paragraph 3(6). The city is also excluded from the local F
area relatable to any other local cadre comprising posts in the
departments belonging to the categories notified in terms of
sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 6. The other exception 'is in
__,
the form of exclusion clause contained in paragraph 14(f) which
operates on its own and does not depend on the issue of G
notification by the Central Government. By virtue of that
+
paragraph, the provisions contained in the Presidential Order
have been made inapplicable to the specified posts, which
include any post of Police Officer as defined in clause (b) of
Section 3 of the Hyderabad Act. This was made more explicit H
218 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A by paragraph 8 of G.O.P. No.728 dated 1.11.1975 issued by
the Government of India, paragraphs 5 and 21 of G.O. Ms. ),
No.729 dated 1.11.1975 and paragraph 2 of G.O. Ms. No.730
of the same date (both issued by the Government of Andhra
Pradesh). When G.O. Ms. No.795 dated 30.6. 1.976 was issued
B incorporating therein the scheme for organization of local ..;.
cadres for non-gazetted categories of posts (both Executive
and Ministerial) and other posts equivalent to or lower than
Lower Division Clerk, the post of Police Officer as defined in
clause (b) of Section 3 of the Hyderabad Act was specifically ~
c excluded. In paragraph 16 of G.O. Ms. No.795, it was made
clear that as no separate cadre for the City of Hyderabad needs
to be organized for the police department and only ministerial
staff of the office of Commissioner of Police will be included in
Zone VI. The posts of the Police Officers of Hyderabad City
D were not shown in the cadre strength of the localized cadres
contained in Annexures IV, V, XII and XIII appended to G.O. Ms. -+·
No. 795. This was so because there was no localization of
Hyderabad City Police cadres. This was also the reason why
a separate range Le., City Range was created for Hyderabad,
Secunderabad and other areas mentioned in First Schedule
E
to· the Presidential Order.

29. From what we have noted above, it is evident that the
post of Police Officer of Hyderabad City as defined in Section
1
3(b) was not included in the process of localization of cadres
F undertaken in terms of paragraphs 3 and 6 of the Presidential
Order. The localii:ation/zonalization of subordinate cadres in the
police department was effected for six zones/ranges but the
same was not applicable to Hyderabad City Police. If this was
not so, there was no reason to exclude posts earmarked for .....
G Hyderabad _City from the statement of cadre strength of
localized cadres enumerated in various Annexures appended
to G.O. Ms. No. 795 dated 30.6.1976. The object of exclusion +
of certain posts from the purview of the Presidential Order and
consequently from the scheme of localization/zonalization
H required to be undertaken in terms of paragraphs 3 and 6
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF A.P. 219
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]
thereof was to make recruitment against such posts open for A
p.
all without giving any preference to any local candidate. The
reason why special status was given to the posts located in the
specified departments of Hyderabad City, which is capital of
the State, was that there should be no monopoly of candidates
belonging to any particular area of the State in the matter of B
recruitment etc. against those posts and all eligible candidates
must get opportunity to compete for selection and appointment.

~ 30. It is also significant to note that after promulgation of
the Presidential Order, Hyderabad City has throughout been
treated as an independent zone or free zone till the impugned
c
judgment was pronounced and recruitment to the post of Police
Officer as defined in Section 3(b) of the Hyderabad Act was
made separately. This was the categorical stand taken by the
official respondents before the Tribunal while contesting the
O.A. of the private respondents. In reply to paragraph 6 of the D
O.A. filed by Sardar Harihar Singh, it was specifically averred
on behalf of the State that vacancies in respect of posts of
Hyderabad City Police are notified separately and selections/
appointments to the posts of Sub-Inspectors of Police, Civil and
Reserve Sub-Inspector, CAR and Police Constable of both E
Civil and CAR to the extent of vacancies are conducted
separately and all six zones and Hyderabad City Police are
~
separate zones for all service matters i.e., appointments,
promotions, etc. and Hyderabad City Police is not part and
parcel of Zone VI. The contra stand taken in the counter F
affidavits filed before this Court is inexplicable and is liable to
be discarded.

31. We shall now consider whether conclusions (b), (c) and
(d) recorded by the Full Bench of the High Court are legally
G
correct and sustainable. The observations of the Full Bench that
+ no separate cadre has been organized and no Police Officer
has been appointed under the Hyderabad Act is based on the
premise that in the advertisement issued for recruitment of
Police Officers and appointment orders of the appellants and
H

'
220 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R.

A other similarly situated persons, reference has not been made
to Hyderabad Act. While doing so, the Full Bench omitted to
take note of the fact that in terms of Section 7 of the Hyderabad
Act, powers to appoint and promote Inspector, Sub-Inspector
and other subordinates of the police force vests in the
B Commissioner of City Police Hyderabad and the said Section
finds specific mention in the preamble to the Special Rules
framed in 1959. Rule 3 of those Rules clearly lays down that
as far as Hyderabad City Police is concerned, the #
y
Commissioner of Police shall be the appointing authority of
c Sub-Inspectors of Police etc. and by virtue of that power, the
Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad has been making
appointments on various subordinate posts including those of
Sub-Inspectors. In the advertisement of 1985 pursuant to which
the appellants were appointed as Sub-Inspectors, 93 posts
were separately earmarked for Hyderabad City which, for the
·o sake of convenience, was described as Zone VII or free zone.
_4

Even in the subsequent advertisements issued in 1991 and
1994, the vacancies of Sub-Inspectors were separately
earmarked for Hyderabad City Police Range. The orders of
appointment of the appellants were issued by the
E Commissioner of Police. This shows that a/separate cadre has
been carved out for Hyderabad City Police and recruitment to
the post of Police Officer as defined in Section 3(b) of the
Hyderabad Act has been made by the designated competent j

authority in terms of Section 7 thereof. Therefore, the Full Bench
F was not justified in curtailing the width and scope of the
exclusion clause contained in paragraph 14(f) of the
Presidential Order by holding that there is no separate cadre
of Hyderabad City Police and there is no incumbent of the post
of Police Officers as defined in Section 3(b) of the Hyderabad
G Act.

32. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the +
conclusions recorded by the Full Bench that no separate cadre
has been organized for the City of Hyderabad within the
meaning of paragraph 3(6) of the Presidential Order; that no
H
P.V. RADHA KRISHNA AND ORS. v. STATE OF AP. 221
AND ORS. [G.S. SINGHVI, J.]

recruitment to the post of Police Officer as defined in Section A
,..::... 3(b) of the Hyderabad Act has been made and there is factually
no incumbent of the post of Police Officer under paragraph
14(f) of the Presidential Order and that the Inspectors of Police
working in the Hyderabad City Police establishment either on
promotion to that post or by direct recruitment must be B
considered as belonging to Zone VI in the zonal cadre cannot
be sustained and are liable to be set aside .
,.. 33. In the result, the appeals are allowed and conclusions
(b), (c) and (d) recorded in the impugned judgment are set C
aside. The parties are left to bear their own costs.

K.K.T. Appeals allowed.

-
..'

+