GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANOTHER, ETC. versus DR. R. MURALI BABU RAO & ANR., ETC.

Citation: [1988] 3 S.C.R. 173 · Decided: 09-03-1988 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.P. SEN · Disposal: Dismissed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

, 
-~ 
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANOTHER, ETC. 
v. 
DR. R. MURALI BABU RAO & ANR., ETC. 
MARCH 9, 1988 
[A.P. SEN AND B.C. RAY, JJ.] 
Andhra Pradesh Medical & Health Service Special Rules 1982-
Challenge to panel prepared under rule 8 of-To fill up promotional 
post of ProJessor of Cardiology with r~quisite five .years' teaching 
experience under rule 5 having the alternate qualification specified in 
cl. (b) of Annexure I1 to Rules, eligible for promotion to 'ilze post of 
Professor of Cardiology. 
These appeals and the special leave petitions were directed against 
the judgment and order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tri-
bunal, quashing the panel of names prepared by the State Government 
under r. 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Medical & Health Service Special 
Rules, 1982 to fill up the promotional post of Professor of Cardiology as 
on lst Joly, 1983, reckoning the teaching experience of all the Assistant 
Professors in that super speciality in order of seniority, holding that the 
Assistant Professors of Cardiology in different medical colleges in the 
State who had the requisite five years' teaching experience under r. 5 of 
the Rules having the alternate qualification in cl. (b) of Annexure II to 
the Rules were eligible for promotion as such, and directing the State 
Government to draw up a fresh paneI after considering the claims of all 
such Assistant Professors of Cardiology treating them as possessing the 
requisite teaching experience in terms of r. 5 for the promotional post of 
Professor of Cardiology as on lst July, 1983. 
There. were four vacancies in the post of Professor of Cardiology .. 
On lst July, 1983, the State Government prepared a panel of all As-
sistant Professors of Cardiology in Government Medical Colleges in the 
State having the requisite teaching experience under r. 5 after obtaining 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
the post-graduate qualification as specified in the Annexure II, and 
included in the panel the· names of .Dr. G. Subramanayam, Dr. A. 
G 
Rajagopala Raju and Dr. Soghra Begum, Assistant Professors of 
Cardiology,' who had on the crucial date-1st July, 1983--five years' 
teaching experience after obtaining their post-graduation degree in DM 
(Cardiology) as enjoined by r. 5 read with the first proviso thereto. and 
by order dated the 17th August, 1983, promoted them to the post of 
Professor of Cardiology. 
H 
173 
·'If 
174 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1988] 3 S.C.R. 
y 
A 
The respondents Dr. R. Mnrali Babu Rao and Dr. G. Sai Gopal 
then moved the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal assailing the 
impugned order of promotion, characterising the action of the State 
Government in the matter of computation of five years' teaching experi-
ence after post-graduation degree in DM (Cardiology) as being wholly 
arbitrary and irrational. 
B 
).. 
The appellant C.H. Umesh Chandra came up in appeal as the 
view expressed by the Tribunal prejudicially affected him. He had 
obtained his post-graduate degree in MD in Medicine in December, 1975 
and his second post-graduate degree in DM (Cardiology) in April, ... 
i980. In view of the fact that he had obtained his second post-graduate 
\ 
c degree in DM (Cardiology) in April, i980, he sought to support the 
stand of the Government as he had a better chance of promotion to the i 
post of Professor of Cardiology. 
After these matters were heard and the judgment was reserved by 
this Court, a similar question came up before the Court in State of 
D 
Orissa v. Dr. Sivsanker Lal Bajoria & Anr.,-Civil Appeal No. 4456 of 
1986 by Special Leave granted to the State Government of Orissa 
against the judgment and order of the High Court, evolving a rnle of 
substantial compliance, and therefore, these matters were re-listed. In 
the Civil Appeal No. 4456 of 1986, the Court issued notice to the Medi-
~ 
cal Council of India to clarify its stand as to the eligibility of Assistant 
E Professors/Readers in Cardiology to the promotional post of Associate 
Professor/Professor in Cardiology and in particular to the import of the 
term 'two years special training' within the meaning of Regulation 
5(2)(b) of the Indian Medical Council Regulations, 1970, framed under 
s. 33 of the Indian Medical Council. Act, 1956. The Court desired the 
~ 
Indian Medical Council to specify the particular institution where such 
F 
training was.imparted. An affidavit sworn to by Assistant Secretary on 
behalf of the Medfcal Council of India was filed, placing its point of 
view
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.