V. JAGANNADHA RAO AND ORS. versus STATE OF A.P. AND ORS.

Citation: [2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 179 · Decided: 07-11-2001 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.B. PATTANAIK · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

--
V. JAGANNADHA RAO AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
ST ATE OF A.P. AND ORS. 
NOVEMBER 7, 2001 
[G.B. PATTANAIK, RUMA PAL AND ARUIT PASAYAT, JJ.] 
B 
Service Law : 
Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and 
Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Ore/er, 1975 : 
Presidential Ore/er-Paras 3(3), 5(1 )--Presidental Ore/er issued under 
Art. 371-D to provide for equitable opportunities and.facilities for the people 
belonging to different parts o.f the State in the matter o.f public employment, 
edurntion etc.-Ministerial posts o.f Factories and Boilers Department were 
organised into Local Cadres pursuant to the Presidential Ore/er-Government 
issued Special Rules under proviso to Art. 309 making Senior Assistant belong-
ing to the Factories and Boilers DepclTlments as well as Labour Department 
eligible .for appointment by trans.fer to the post of Assistant Labour Officer/ 
Assistant Inspector o.f Factories in the Andhra Pradesh Labour Suborclinate 
Service - State Administmtive Tribunal declared that the impugned Rules to the 
extent they enabled the ministerial em11loyees of the Factories and Boilers 
Department or any other Department to be considered for appointment to the 
posts in Labour Department are violative o.f paras 3 and 5 o.f the Presidential 
Ore/er and, therefore, were void-Correctness of-Held: Art. 371-D( 10) and 
c 
D 
any ore/er made by the President thereunder shall prevail over any Rule made 
F 
under proviso to Art. 309 if such Rule is not .framed in accorclance with the 
Presidential Ore/er-The Special Rule to the extent indicated by the Tribunal is 
constitutionally i1ll'alid and rightly struck down-Constitution of India, 1950, 
Arts. 309 arul 371-D-Fundamental Rules, Rr. 2(18) and 15(a). 
Para 5(2)--Tran.~fer-Scope and ambit of-Held: Transfer means a 
change of place o.f employment within an organisation-It is an incidence o.f 
public service-It is essentia/y to a similar post in the same cadre and does not 
incluc/e promotion-Trans.fer is a lateral and not a vertical movement within the 
G 
employer's organisation. Interpretation o.f Statutes : 
H 
179 
180 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2001] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 
A 
Rules qf construction-Intention qf legislature-Detennination qf-Held: 
B 
c 
D 
Has to be determined.from the la~g~wge'o.f the statute-A cnmtructinn requir-
ing addition or l'Ubstitution o,f words .or rejection of ~vords as n1eaningless has 
to be avoided. 
'' 
. 
Words and Phrases : 
I 
, 
"Tran~fer"-Meaning of-In the context qf para 5(2) qf Andhra Pradesh 
Public Employment (Organisation of local Cadres and Regulation of Direct 
of Recruitment) Order, 1975. 
The Labour and Factdries Department of the State of A.P. con· 
sisted of 3 units, namely, La.hour, Factories and Boilers: Subsequently, 
one more unit, namely, Establishment Unit was created. A Presidential 
Order,· namely, Andhra Prailesh Public Employment (Organisation) of 
Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitn;erit) Order, 1975 was 
~ , . 
I 
-
, 
·. ' 
-: 
. . . 
' 
-
issued under Article 371-D of the Constitution to provide for e9uitable 
opportunities and facilities for the people belonging to differeni'parts of 
the State in the matter of pu'blk employment, education etc. Minis.terial 
posts of Factories and Boile'rs' Department were. organised info Local 
Cadres pursuant to the Presidential Order. The Government issued Spe· 
cial Rules under proviso to Article 309 making Senior Assistant belonging 
E 
to the Factories and Boilers Departments as well as Labour Department 
eligible· for appointment by' transfer· to the post of· Ai;sistant Labour 
Officer/Assistant Inspector of Factories in the Andhra Pradesh Labour 
Subordinate Service. The Ministerial employees of°the Labour Depart· 
ment challenged the said Special Rules before the Stale Administrative 
F 
Tribunal. The Tribunal declared that the impugned Rules lo the extent 
they enabled the ministerial·employees of the Factories and Boilers De· 
partment or any other Department to be c~risidered for appointment to 
the posts in Labour Department are violative of paras 3 and 5 of the 
Presidential Order and, therefore, were ·void. Hence this appeal. 
G 
' 
On behalf of the appellants it was contended that the expression 
'transfer' used in para 5(2) pf the .Presidential Order had to be given a 
wider meaning .and that pro!Dolional prospects were clearly inter-linked 
prospects and could not be divested from a transfer. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
\ 
-
-
V.

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