V. Ayyanna vs Govt. Of A.P. & Ors

Assistant's post. It is also to be clarified at this stage that

Basic Health Workers, Superior Field Workers, Malaria

Surveillance Workers were drawing lesser scale of pay

than that of the pay-scale attached to the post of

Multipurpose Health Assistants at the relevant time. It is

2 also required to be stated that the basic qualification

required for appointment to the post of Multipurpose

Health Assistant was that the candidate must possess

the academic qualification of intermediate and must have

a Sanitary Inspector Training Course [for short `SITC']

Certificate, which was in vogue on the date of G.O.Ms.

No. 85, dated 21.1.1978. The aforesaid G.O.Ms.

stipulated that Basic Health workers, Malaria

Surveillance Workers and others would continue to draw

their own scale of pay till they acquire the SITC certificate

and get converted as Health Assistants.

3. The appellant herein was not having a SITC certificate

qualification as on 21.01.1978 and he acquired the said

SITC certificate subsequently.

4. After the issuance of the aforesaid notification and

creation of one cadre of Health Assistants, a seniority list

was prepared in the cadre of Multipurpose Health

Assistant Workers. The said seniority list in that cadre

came to be challenged before the State Administrative

Tribunal attacking the principle of fixation of seniority on

the basis of qualifications. Pursuant to the aforesaid

3 challenge, the Tribunal decided the said issue in R.P. No.

2860 of 1987 and batch and separately in O.A. No. 5410

of 1994 and batch. In terms of the order passed by the

Tribunal, the respondents proceeded to prepare a

seniority list dated 03.09.1998.

5. The appellant herein and some other persons, without

seeking any review of the earlier orders passed by the

Tribunal in R.P. No. 2860 of 1987 and batch and O.A.

No. 5410 of 1994 and batch, which had incidentally

become final and binding and pursuant to which the

aforesaid seniority list was prepared in the year 1998,

challenged not only the aforesaid seniority list, but also

the principle laid down by the Tribunal in the earlier

orders passed in R.P. No. 2860 of 1987 and batch and

O.A. No. 5410 of 1994 and batch. The State

Administrative Tribunal, after considering the issues

raised by the appellant herein and others, dismissed the

said petition on the ground that the principle of fixation

of seniority in the cadre of Health Assistants was already

settled in view of the decision in the aforesaid R.P. and

4 O.A. which had since become final and binding and,

therefore, no interference was called for.

6. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellant herein

and others filed various Writ Petitions before the High

Court which were taken up together, and by a common

judgment and order dated 03.11.2003, High Court

dismissed all the Writ Petitions including that of the

appellant herein. Being aggrieved by the said judgment

and order of the High Court, present appeal by way of a

Special Leave Petition is filed on which we heard the

learned counsel appearing for the parties.

7. Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted before us

that the appellant, pursuant to the G.O.Ms. No. 85 dated

21.01.1978, is entitled to get his seniority in the category

of Multipurpose Health Assistant from the date on which

their services were regularized in the category of Basic

Health Worker / Field Worker / Malaria Surveillance

Worker, etc. He also submitted that the very principle

settled by the Tribunal in R.P. No. 2860 of 1987 and

batch and O.A. No. 5410 of 1994 and batch is illegal and

contrary to law. It was his further submission that

5 seniority should always be counted from the date of

appointment and, therefore, giving the benefit of seniority

from an artificial date is arbitrary and required to be set

aside and quashed.

8. Counsel appearing for the respondent, however, refuted

the aforesaid allegations and submitted that the criteria

of fixation of seniority having been settled by the State

Tribunal in R.P. No. 2860 of 1987 and batch and O.A.

No. 5410 of 1994 and batch, and the appellant having

not taken any steps to get the same set aside and

quashed by filing a separate petition before the Tribunal,

the said principle, which has become final and binding,

cannot be challenged at such a distant stage. It was also

submitted that the appellant was working in the scale

lower than that of Multipurpose Health Assistant and,

therefore, he cannot ask for his seniority from the date of

issuance of the notification by the State Government

creating single cadre effective from 21.01.1978, but he

would be entitled to get his seniority once he acquired

the qualification of acquiring the SITC certificate, which

6 was one of the essential qualifications for appointment to

the said post.

9. In the light of the aforesaid submissions of the counsel

appearing for the parties, we have considered the records

in depth. The appellant was working as Basic Health

Worker which was carrying a lesser pay-scale than that

of the Multipurpose Health Assistant. The aforesaid post

to which the appellant was appointed and on which he

was working as on 21.01.1978, did not belong to or was

equivalent to the post of Health Assistant. However, the

State Government, in order to have a rationalized

structure of posts, merged various categories of posts to

constitute a single cadre of Health Assistants.

Consequently, the Government also issued the aforesaid

G.O.Ms. No. 85 dated 21.01.1978 merging various posts

including that of the Basic Health Worker to

Multipurpose Health Assistant. It may be stated at this

stage that under the then existing rules framed by the

Government which was in operation and in vogue as on

21.01.1978, the qualification for appointment to the post

of Health Assistant was intermediate pass with a

7 certificate of Sanitary Inspector Training Course. The

appellant did not have the said qualification as he did not

possess a certificate of the aforesaid nature, therefore,

although his post was merged with that of the

Multipurpose Health Assistants, he was not given the

same pay-scale till he had acquired the aforesaid

qualification or possessing a SITC certificate. The

aforesaid actions were taken by the respondents

pursuant to the specific stipulations in the notification

itself which stated that Basic Health Workers, Malaria

Surveillance Workers and others would continue to draw

their own scale of pay till they acquire SITC certificate

and get converted as Health Assistants. The appellant

was not having SITC certificate qualification as on

21.01.1978 and he had acquired SITC certificate

subsequently.

10.State Government subsequently issued revised rules in

G.O.Ms. No. 273, Health dated 24.04.1989 as far as the

post of Multipurpose Health Assistant is concerned. The

said rules were given retrospective effect from 01.04.1983

and an order was also issued on 30.03.1982 by the State

8 Government to prepare a seniority list in the feeder

categories as per G.O.Ms. No. 85 dated 21.01.1978.

11. The follow-up action taken by the State Government was

challenged by some of the employees by filing R.P. No.

1530/1985. The State Tribunal disposed of the said R.P.

by its judgment dated 05.07.1986. Subsequent thereto,

another judgment was rendered by the said Tribunal in

R.P. No. 2860/1987 and batch which was delivered on

25.09.1987 in which various directions were issued to

Respondents for preparation of the seniority list.

Subsequently, OAs No. 5410/94 and batch were filed

seeking a direction to the Respondents to implement the

judgment dated 25.09.1987. The above OAs were

disposed of on 28-11-1995 issuing directions to the State

Govt. in terms of the directions issued earlier in the

judgment dated 25.09.1987 in R.P. No. 2860/1987 and

batch. In both the judgments, i.e. the judgment dated

25.09.1987 in R.P. No. 2860/1987 and batch and the

judgment dated 28.11.1995 in OAs No. 5410/94 and

batch, it was categorically held that Basic Health

Workers and others who were not required to pass

9 Sanitary Inspector Training Course for regularization in

their service but who were designated as Health

Assistant on passing the SITC shall count their seniority

in the category of Health Assistants from

21.01.1978/01.01.1980 or from the date of passing the

SITC, whichever is later, the inter se seniority among

them being determined on the basis of their length of

service in the lower category of Basic Health Workers etc.

12.Consequent upon the directions given in the aforesaid

judgments, a seniority list was prepared on 03.09.1998,

the legality and validity of which was challenged before

the Tribunal and also before this Court.

13.The aforesaid facts make it crystal clear that the orders

which were passed by the Tribunal in the earlier

litigation had become final and binding and the final

seniority list was prepared in compliance thereof. The

effect of the said final seniority list is that the appellant

would get his seniority in the aforesaid cadre from the

date he has obtained the SITC certificate and not from a

prior date. It is needless to point out, and also made clear

hereinbefore, that possession of a SITC certificate is an

10 essential qualification, and as such, the appellant could

not have claimed his seniority from a retrospective date.

He could get his seniority only from the date when he

acquired such a certificate in terms of the provisions of

the rules.

14.As the principles stated say that the persons who have

been re-designated as Health Assistants on passing the

SITC certificate would count their seniority in the cadre

as Health Assistant from 21.01.1978/01.01.1980 or from

the date of passing the SITC certificate whichever is later,

the Tribunal upheld the aforesaid position and held that

the appellant would be entitled to get his seniority on the

aforesaid principle, i.e., from 20.01.1978/01.01.1980 or

from the date of passing the SITC certificate, whichever is

later. The aforesaid findings recorded by the Tribunal,

which reiterated the earlier orders passed by the Tribunal

on 25.09.1987 and 28.11.1995, appear to be just and

proper and cannot be said to be in any manner to be

arbitrary.

15.In terms of the circular issued by the Government, the

appellant although appointed initially to the category of

11 Health Assistant, could not be so appointed on a regular

basis till he had passed the SITC and therefore, his

seniority will have to be counted from the date when he

obtained such a certificate or from

21.01.1978/01.01.1980, whichever is later, and he could

not have claimed for a seniority position prior to the

effective date as he was not eligible to hold such a post.

16.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we

are of the considered opinion that the judgment and

order passed by the High Court affirming the judgment

and order passed by the Tribunal is legal and valid and

that there is no infirmity in the said orders.

17.Consequently, we find no merit in this appeal, which

stands dismissed but we leave the parties to bear their

own costs.

............................................J [ J.M. Panchal ]

............................................J

12 [Dr. Mukundakam Sharma]

New Delhi, September 23, 2010.

13