D. KRISHNA MURTHY AND ANR. versus THE STATE OF A.P. AND ORS.

Citation: [1994] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 90 · Decided: 02-09-1994 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
D. KRISHNA MURTHYAND ANR. 
v. 
THE STATE OF AP. AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 2, 1994 
B 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.] 
Andh,ra Pradesh Subordinate Service Rules: Rule 37(a)(i). 
Service Law-Reversion Order attaining finality--Order operated as 
C Res-Judicata-Direction by Tribunal to reinstate on the post from which 
reverted-Held not justified. 
Respondeat No. 3 was appointed as Typist in the Hyderabad Water 
Works Department and was promoted as Upper Division Clerk. The 
D appellants were appointed and promoted before him. Subsequent to the 
creation of Maneru Investigation Circle, Respondent No.3 was transferred 
to that Circle on the basis of his option. There, he was promoted as Bead 
Clerk, and upgraded as Superintendent. Be gave an undertaking that he 
will not claim any seniority or pay protection as Head Clerk either in the 
Circle or in his parent Department. However, later he was reverted as 
E 
Senior Assistant. Be unsuccessfully challenged the reversion order before 
the Tribunal. The review petition as well as Special Leave Petition filed 
against the Tribunal's order was also rejected and consequently the rever-
sion order became final and conclusive between him and the appellants. 
F 
G 
, Be filed another petition for quashing the reversion which was dismissed 
against which he filed anothe_r special leave petition. In the meantime, the 
Act of 1982 under which Water Supply and Sewerage Board was con-
stituted, was repealed and for the management of the Water Works 
Department and continuance of its employees the Government issued G.O. 
No. 590 dated 22nd September, 1993. Thereafter, another Act was passed 
which constituted a Board. In view of the fact that a new Act came into 
force and the Board was reconstituted a representation was made to this 
Court and this Court dismissed the petition with a direction to the Board 
to frame its Regulation of service conditions of employees and in case 
Respondent No. 3 has any grievance he was entitled to state his claim. 
The~after, respondent No. 3 filed applications before the Tribunal against 
H · his reversion and for a direction for giving promotion to him. The Tribunal 
90 
,.
D.K. MURTIIYv. STATE 
91 
held the his reversion was in violation of G.O. No. 590 and accordingly A 
directed his reinstatement. 
In appeal to this court it was contended on behalf of the appeallant 
that since the reversion order beca~e final by dismissal of special leave 
petition the Tribunal was unjustified in directing the reinstatement of 
respondent 3. 
B 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
HELD : 1. The Court cannot go into the legality whether Respondent 
No. 3 was rightly or wrongly reverted for the reason that his reversion 
order had become final and it operates as a res-judicata in these proceed-
C 
ings against him. This Court's observations in the second special leave 
petition that it was open to the Board to make Rules and for Respondent 
no. 3 to pursue the remedy thereunder does not have the effect of reviving 
the order of reversion which had become final. The Tribunal was wrong in 
giving direction to reinstate Respondent No. 3 as Superintendent and to D 
give him consequential benefits. (94-D-E-G] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 6021 of 
1994. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 31.1.94 of the Andhra Pradesh E 
Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad in O.A. No. 1380/93. 
Narasimha P.S., Ashok Kumar and P.Kesava Pillai for the Appel-
lants. 
Venkatashwarlu-in-person. 
G. Prabhakar for the Respondent. 
The follwing Order of the Court was delivered : 
F 
Leave granted. 
G 
Th~ appellants. - D. Krishna Murthy and P. Damodar Reddy were 
appointed as Lower Division Clerks now designated as Junior Assistants 
in the year 1961-62 in the Department of Hyderabad Water Works Depart-
ment, Government of Andhra Pradesh. They were duly promoted as Upper 
Divison Clerks now designated as Senior Assistants in ~969. Mr. M. H . 
92 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994) SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A Venkatashwarlu, the third respondent in this appeal, was appointed as a 
Typist in the year 1970 and he was promoted as Senior Assistant on June 
9, 1978. While they were continuing as Senior Assistants, the Manero 
Investigation Circle was created for the supply of drinking water to 
Hyderabad city. At that time Venkatashwarlu had opted to go for the 
B Circle. Accordingly, he was transferred as UDC to Maneru Investigation 
Circle. While he was working there, a vacancy had arisen fo

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.