LexTELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) versus ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO (S). 1270/2020 IN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 987 TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) v. ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. Miscellaneous Application No (s). 1270/2020 In (Civil Appeal No (s). 11435/2018) DECEMBER 07, 2020. [ASHOK BHUSHAN AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.] Service Law – Allocation of employees – Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 – ss.3,4 and 82 – Dispute relating to allocation of the employees of the power sector undertakings in the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh arose in wake of the division of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh into two States, namely, the State of Telangana and the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh – The power utilities of the two newly formed States could not arrive at any consensus with regard to modalities for allocation and distribution of personnel – The power utilities of Telangana unilaterally relieved 1157 employees working with power utilities of Telangana to join in respective power utilities of Andhra Pradesh – The power utilities of Telangana were motivated by principle of nativity, i.e., those employees whose service records mentioned them as resident of any part of the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh were relieved and those who belonged to territory of the newly formed State of Telangana were permitted to join at Telangana by their self-option, against which writ petition was filed before the High Court – The High Court by its judgment dated 02.02.2018 allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned action of power utilities of Telangana relieving 1157 employees and issued further directions – In appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the judgment of the High Court and with the agreement of the parties entrusted the task to one-Man Committee for distributing the personnel between the States – The process which was initiated by submitting Final Report dated 26.12.2019 was supplemented by Supplementary Report dated 11.03.2020 and Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 – In the Concluding Report, an allocation list submitted by Andhra [2020] 13 S.C.R. 987 987 A B C D E F G H 988 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2020] 13 S.C.R. Pradesh utilities was approved – The Committee noticed that 655 employees were allocated from Telangana State to Andhra Pradesh and equal numbers from Andhra Pradesh to Telangana including 71 names from Andhra Pradesh to Telangana, which was held to be of special cases like spouse and medical cases – Certain further directions were given by the One-Man Committee along with the concluding report – Various Miscellaneous applications were filed – There were various objections against the One-Man Committee report – Held: The One-Man Committee being aware of all objections and having taken a conscious decision to finalise the allocation between two States, there is no error in the process which may warrant any clarification or direction – Applicants have taken exception to reciprocity of 655 number – There is no error in reciprocity – The One-Man Committee took a decision that when 655 employees are coming from Telangana State to Andhra Pradesh, same number should go from Andhra Pradesh to Telangana State – In the Concluding Report, final list was annexed, which is utility- wise and personnel-wise, which is clear and unambiguous – Thus, power utilities of both the States and all concerned to carry out and implement the directions of the One-Man Committee Report. Service Law – Allocation of employees – Andhra Pradesh Reorganisaiton Act, 2014 – ss.3,4 and 82 – Challenge to allocation done by One-Man Committee – Held: In the instant case, the One- Man Committee was entrusted only with distribution of personnel between the two States, which distribution has been finalised by the One-Man Committee – Insofar as the allocation made by the One- Man Committee, no objection or challenge by any employee or officer is entertainable, it was further clarified that the One-Man Committee having completed the process of allocation, the said allocation cannot be challenged by any employee or officer or any utility before any forum. Disposing of the Miscellaneous Applications, the Court HELD: 1. One objection of the applicants, which needs to be noticed is the objection that even the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 is not final report and Sub-Committee Member of Andhra Pradesh has been authorised to modify the list. Applicants have referred to direction Nos. I, II and III of the Concluding Report. Now, taking note of the direction No.I of the One-Man A B C D E F G H 989 Commi
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.