REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1270/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 11435/2018
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) ...APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. ...RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1286/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11435/2018
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) ...APPELLANT(S)/
APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION………………DIARY NO.13844/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11435/2018
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) ...APPELLANT(S)/
T.N. SUDHAKARA MURTHY & ORS. APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
1
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1287/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11435/2018
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) ...APPELLANT(S)/
APSPDCL RELIEVED EMPLOYYES APPLICANT(S)
(ALLOTTED TO TSNPDCL)
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1290/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11436/2018
TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF
TELANGANA LTD. (TSTRANSCO) ...APPELLANT(S)/
APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA
PRADESH LTD.(APTRANSCO) AND ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1292/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11438/2018
TELANGANA SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION
CORPORATION LTD. (TSSPDCL) ...APPELLANT(S)/
APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION
CORPORATION LTD. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
2
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1331/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11435/2018
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) ...APPELLANT(S)/
APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. ` ...RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1291/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11437/2018
TELANGANA STATE NORTHERN POWER
DISTRIBUTION CORPORATION LTD(TSNPDCL)...APPELLANT(S)/
APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH SOUTHERN POWER
DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED
(APSPDCL) & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1289/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11435/2018
TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF
TELANGANA LTD. (TSTRANSCO) ...APPELLANT(S)/
APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA
PRADESH LTD.(APTRANSCO) AND ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
3
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1293/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11440/2018
TELANGANA ELECRICITY ENGINEERS
ASSOCIATION & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S)/
APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
MUDE NARSIMHULU & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION………………DIARY NO.16612/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11435/2018
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD (TSGENCO) ...APPELLANT(S)/
ANDE JAGADISH & ORS. APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO(S). 1631/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11435/2018
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD (TSGENCO) ...APPELLANT(S)/
L. PRAVEENKUMAR REDDY & ORS. APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
4
WITH
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION………………DIARY NO.19295/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11453/2018
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD (TSGENCO) & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S)/
KESANA BABU RAO & ORS. APPLICANT(S)
VERSUS
J.V.V. SURESH
KUMAR & ORS. ETC. ETC. ...RESPONDENT(S)
AND
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION………………DIARY NO.19982/2020
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).11453/2018
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD (TSGENCO) ...PETITIONER (S)
VERSUS
J.V.V. SURESH
KUMAR & ORS. ETC. ETC. ...RESPONDENT(S)/
J.V.V. SURESH KUMAR & ORS. APPLICANTS
J U D G M E N T
ASHOK BHUSHAN,J.
These Miscellaneous Applications have been filed
in Civil Appeal No.11435 of 2018 decided by this
Court vide judgment dated 28.11.2018. Civil Appeal
5
No. 11435 of 2018 was filed against the common
judgment dated 02.02.2018 passed by the High Court of
Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana
and the State of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Petition
No.17994 of 2015 and other connected writ petitions.
2. The High Court vide its judgment dated 02.02.2018
decided the bunch of writ petitions raising the
dispute pertaining to allocation of the employees of
the power sector undertakings in the States of
Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. The disputes arose in
the 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
by Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014. This
Court vide its judgment dated 28.11.2018 while
upholding the judgment of the High Court with the
agreement of the learned counsel for the parties
appointed a One-Man Committee consisting of Justice
D.M. Dharmadhikari, a former Judge of this Court for
distributing the personnel between two States. After
the judgment of this Court dated 28.11.2018, One-Man
Committee proceeded to formulate the modalities for
6
distributing the personnel, prepared the reports
allocating the personnel at several stages. The
miscellaneous applications were filed in this Court
in the civil appeal in pursuance of the liberty
granted by this Court in its judgment dated
28.11.2018 permitting the parties to approach the
Court by filing an interlocutory application, if any,
clarification or further directions were required.
3. The present set of miscellaneous applications
have been filed by Telangana Power Utilities, certain
employees and employees’ associations after
submission of the concluding report dated 20.06.2020
by the One-Man Committee.
4. Before we proceed to consider the present set of
miscellaneous applications, it is necessary to notice
the genesis of dispute.
5. The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisaiton Act, 2014
(hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2014”) was enacted
by Parliament to provide for the reorganisation of
7
the existing State of Andhra Pradesh and for matters
connected therewith. By Section 3, Telangana State
was formed comprising of the territories mentioned
therein and by virtue of Section 4, the State of
Andhra Pradesh was to comprise the territories of the
existing state of Andhra Pradesh. In the present
case, we are concerned only with power utilities.
Related provision for employees of public sector
undertaking is contained in Section 82, which is to
the following effect:-
“82. Provision for employees of Public
Sector Undertakings, etc.—On and from the
appointed day, the employees of State
Public Sector Undertakings, corporations
and other autonomous bodies shall continue
to function in such undertaking,
corporation or autonomous bodies for a
period of one year and during this period
the corporate body concerned shall
determine the modalities for distributing
the personnel between the two successor
States.”
6. 02.06.2014 was notified as the appointed date
under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014.
In the United State of Andhra Pradesh, existing power
utilities where Andhra Pradesh Generation
Corporation, Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation
and four Power Distribution Companies described as
8
Eastern, Southern, Central and Northern DISCOMS. The
State of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh issued Government
Orders dated 29.05.2014, No.24 for Distribution
Companies, Government Order No.25 for Generation
Companies and Government Order No.26 for Transmission
Corporation whereby assets and liabilities of the
aforesaid corporations and companies were apportioned
between the two new States alongwith the posts
sanctioned for the employees working in those power
sector corporations/companies. 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.
7. The power utilities of Telangana unilaterally
relieved 1157 employees working with power utilities
of Telangana to join in respective power utilities of
Andhra Pradesh. Number of employees filed writ
petitions in High Court challenging the decision of
the power utilities of Telangana. 242 employees, who
were working in power utilities of Andhra Pradesh got
themselves relieved and joined in power utilities of
Telangana. The power utilities of Telangana were
9
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 common 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. The High Court specifically disapproved
the principle of nativity, which was the factor for
allocation of the employees by the Telangana State
power utilities.
8. Telangana Power Generation Corporation Limited
filed Civil Appeal No. 11435/2018 questioning the
judgment of High Court. This Court upheld the order
of the High Court, however, noticing that two States
have not been able to arrive at any consensus and to
finally determine the modalities for distributing the
personnel between two States, this Court with the
10
agreement of the parties entrusted the task to OneMan Committee, i.e., Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari, a
former Judge of this Court. While ending the order
dated 28.11.20218, this Court further clearly
stated:-
“We make it clear that the decision of
the one man Committee head by Justice
Dharmadhikari shall be final and binding
on all the parties including Power Utility
Companies of the two States as well as the
employees and shall be executed by all the
parties as an order of this Court.”
9. This Court, however, while disposing the appeal
had observed that in case, any clarification or
further direction is required by any of the parties
they are entitled to approach this Court by filing
interlocutory application in the proceedings. OneMan Committee constituted a sub-Committee consisting
of two members representing one each of the power
utilities of both the States. Many employees,
individuals also appeared and filed representations
before the Committee. The Committee on 17.04.2019
had finalised XIV modalities to be adopted for
allocation of the personnel between two States in
accordance with Section 82 of the Andhra Pradesh
11
Reorganisation Act, 2014. Telangana Power Generation
Corporation Limited filed an application being M.A.
No. 851 of 2019 questioning the modalities finalised
by One-Man Committee. However, this Court did not
entertain the application. A report cited as “Final
Report of One-Man Committee” dated 26.12.2019 was
submitted by One-Man Committee. Alongwith report, a
final allocation list in the two States
corporations/companies was prepared and annexed.
List of 655 personnel, who were to go from Telangana
utilities to Andhra Pradesh utilities as submitted by
sub-Committee Members on behalf of Telangana
utilities was approved by the Hon’ble One-Man
Committee and was part of the final list. The Andhra
Pradesh utilities being felt aggrieved by the final
list communicated in the final report filed I.A. Nos.
11779/2020, 11752/2020 and 11785/2020. It was
stated by learned counsel for the applicant that they
have no grievance with regard to modalities. Their
submission was that the modalities have not been
correctly implemented and the list annexed is not in
accordance with the modalities. The applications
were disposed of by this Court on 24.01.2020. This
12
Court while disposing the applications made following
observations:-
“This Court by the final judgment
having entrusted the work of allocation to
one man committee, as agreed by parties,
the modalities finalized by one man
committee is binding on all, to which,
there is no dissension between the
parties. There being no dispute regarding
modalities, in event, there is some error
or mistake in the working of the
modalities that can be pointed out to the
same committee by means of a
representation and we hope and trust that
the committee shall look into the said
grievance and correct the error, if any.
We also make it clear that if the
representation is submitted by the
applicant, copy of the same shall be given
to the power utilities of both the Sates,
who may also have liberty to submit a
response to those representation, which
may be considered by the one man
committee. The representation be submitted
within two weeks and response thereto be
also submitted within two weeks
thereafter.”
10. After the order dated 24.01.2020, the One-Man
Committee after deliberations with all stakeholders
submitted a Supplementary Report dated 11.03.2020.
In the Supplementary Report, it was noticed that T.S.
power utilities relieved employees numbering total
655 to join A.P. power utilities. It also noted that
Telangana Power Utilities are agreeable to
13
accommodate 71 employees from Andhra Pradesh to
Telangana State companies as they are special cases
like of spouses, medical and handicapped employees or
their dependants.
11. In the Supplementary Report, the One-Man
Committee entrusted the work to the member of the
Sub-Committee representing Andhra Pradesh side, of
identification of 584 employees for allocating them
from A.P. power utilities to T.S. power utilities.
One-Man Committee also issued directions for payment
of salary for 655 employees, who were relieved from
Telangana utilities to Andhra Pradesh. One-Man
Committee directed that entire allocation process
based on the allocation lists with the Final Report
and Supplementary Report be completed by 30.03.2020.
A clarification dated 13.03.2020 was also issued by
the One-Man Committee. Aggrieved by Supplementary
Report, the Telangana power utilities filed
Miscellaneous Application No. 920 of 2020. With
regard to 584 employees, who were directed to be
identified by Sub-Committee Members of Andhra
Pradesh, this Court disposed of the application
14
observing that objections with regard to 584
employees were to be considered by One Man Committee.
On an application submitted by One-Man Committee,
this Court also passed an order for payment of salary
to the allocated employees.
12. One-Man Committee after the order of this Court
dated 01.05.2020 issued a Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020. In the Concluding Report, an allocation
list submitted by Andhra Pradesh utilities was
approved. The Committee noticed that 655 employees
have been 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 in the Concluding
Report in paragraph 29 like approving the list of
Sub-Committee Members of the Andhra Pradesh. In the
Concluding Report, directions are to the following
effect:-
15
DIRECTIONS
I. In addition to the Directions
contained in Para 21 of the
Supplementary Report of this Committee
regarding retired employees on both
sides, it is further directed, that in
both the States, employees who have
attained or will be attaining 58 Years
of age in the year 2020 will be kept
out of the allocation process and
their names in the Allocation Lists
will be removed.
II. In the allocation process of the
present dimension and undertaken after
5 years delay, it is not possible for
the Committee to satisfy individual
needs and comforts and service
prospects of every employee. The
allocation process has been finalized
on laid down principles contained in
the modalities and elbow room,
wherever permissible, in the
modalities has been given effect to.
The committee however directs the Sub
Committee member of AP to re-examine
any left out spouse and medical cases
and every attempt should be made to
accommodate them in the state of their
option.
III. All SC/ST employees cases be reexamined to accommodate them as per
modality VIII in the State where they
are notified as SCs or STs so as not
to affect their future service growth.
IV. All the employees finally allocated to
a Public Utility will be paid regular
salary from January 2020 and arrears
of salary due with other benefits
attached to the posts. The payments of
16
salary partly or fully made by the
Companies in the Two States in the
interim period pending finalization of
allocation during coronavirus
pandemic, will be shared/reimbursed by
the companies in the Two States
mutually by paying and claiming
reimbursement, if necessary, for the
payments made in the interim period.
It is made clear that the entire
burden of salary and arrears of salary
for each employee would be on the
Company to which the employee is
finally allocated and the said Company
will reimburse interim payments
pending allocation made if any by the
Company to which the employee has not
been finally allocated.
V. All employees not included in the
Allocation List of AP and TS and
serving on "order to serve" basis in
the Companies on the formation of the
Two States in 2014 would be deemed to
have been allocated to the Company
where they are presently posted and
working.
VI. Based on the allocation lists, both TS
and AP utilities will issue orders of
posting and joining, with granting
sufficient time to the employees to
report for duties, keeping into
consideration the constrains on
movements in the current coronavirus
pandemic period and the consequent
lockdown imposed.
VII. All Employers of the Power Utilities
in the Two States will facilitate
smooth posting and joining of
employees in the Companies of the Two
States and the Government and the
Police Authorities of Two States will
17
cooperate and also facilitate the
movement of the employees allocated
from one Company in the State to
Company in another Slate.
VIII. The allocation finally made by
this committee is binding on both the
employers and the employees and any
violation thereof and non
implementation of said allocation be
reported to Supreme Court for
remedial/Punitive action.”
13. After the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020, a
member of the Sub-Committee of Andhra Pradesh power
utilities sent a letter dated 26.06.2020 as
compliance report. By the said letter, 119
employees, who were dropped from the list of incoming
employees from Telangana State power utilities to
Andhra Pradesh power utilities and further 50 names
were dropped of employees in outgoing list of
employees from Andhra Pradesh power utilities to
Telangana State power utilities and 10 further
employees were relieved from Andhra Pradesh power
utilities for the reasons mentioned therein.
14. After the submission of the Concluding Report and
follow-up action taken by the Andhra Pradesh power
18
utilities, this group of miscellaneous applications
have been filed. The miscellaneous applications have
been filed by Telangana State power utilities, by
several employees as well as employees’ associations
in M.A. No. 1286/2020 filed by Telangana State Power
Generation Corporation Ltd., a common counter
affidavit has been filed by Andhra Pradesh power
utilities. The M.A. No. 1286 of 2020 as well as
counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit filed
therein shall be referred to while deciding these
batch of miscellaneous applications.
15. We may now briefly notice prayers made in
different Miscellaneous Applications placed before us
for consideration:-
M.A. No.1270/2020
M.A. No. 1270 of 2020 is a miscellaneous
application which was registered by Court’s Motion on
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 sent by One-Man
Committee to this Court.
19
M.A. DIARY NO.13844/2020
This M.A. Diary has been filed by T.N. Sudhakara
Murthy and 32 others seeking a direction to A.P. and
T.S. utilities not to give effect to direction No.I
of the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020. They seek
direction to A.P. power utilities to retain the
applicants as per their options.
M.A. NO.1286/2020
M.A. No.1286 of 2020 has been filed by Telangana
State Power Generation Corporation Ltd. The M.A.
questions the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020
submitted by One-Man Committee. In the M.A.
following prayers have been made:-
“a) Clarify that the Concluding Report
dated 20-06-2020 submitted by the Hon’ble
One-Man Committee is illegal and
arbitrary, being contrary to the Orders
passed by this Hon’ble court and the Final
Report dated 26-12-2019 submitted by the
Hon’ble One-Man Committee.
b) Confirm the allocation of 1157
employees and 242 employees made by the
Hon'ble One-Man Committee as per Final
Report dt. 26-12-2018, (i.e., the
Allocation of 744 (502 +242) to TS Power
Utilities and 655 from TS to AP Power
utilities), as Final in terms of the Order
20
dt. 28.11.2018 passed in present Civil
Appeal.
c) Clarify that the allocation of 4460 and
71 employees (4531) to TS Power Utilities
vide Final Report dt. 26.12.2019 and
Supplementary Report dt. 11.03.2020, is
final and no further allocation to TS
Power Utilities is Permissible.
d) Clarify that the Supplementary Report
in so far as Para No.27, authorizing the
Member, Sub-committee of AP to
unilaterally identify and allocate 584
employees to TS Power Utilities is
contrary to the orders dated 28-11-2018 in
Civil Appeal No.11435/2018.
e) Clarify the orders dated 28-11-2018 in
Civil Appeal No. 11435 of 2018 passed by
this Hon'bIe Court; and
f) Pass such other or further order(s) as
may be deemed fit and appropriate by this
Hon’ble Court in the facts and
circumstances of the present case.”
M.A. NO.1287/2020
This M.A. has been filed by APSPDCL relieved
employees (allotted to TSNPDCL). The applicants
claimed to be permanent employees of Andhra Pradesh
Southern Power Distribution Company now allocated to
Telangana State Northern Power Distribution Company
Ltd. The applicants question their allotment to
TSNPDCL. The applicants case is that they were not
included in the employees allocated by Final Report
21
dated 26.12.2019. Their names have suddenly come in
Concluding Report for allocation. The applicants
claimed that allocation of employees of APSPDCL
working in Kurnool and Ananthapur Districts were to
be finally allocated in terms of G.O. No.24 dated
29.05.2014 and they ought not to have been made part
of the allocation to Telangana power utilities. The
applicants prayed that their allocation to TSNPDCL be
cancelled. They prayed that letter dated 26.06.2020
submitted by APSPDCL to One-Man Committee and
approved by One-Man Committee by Concluding Report
dated 20.06.2020 be got recalled and rescinded.
M.A. NO. 1290/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Transmission
Corporation of Telangana Ltd. The prayers made in
the application are similar to those made in M.A.
No.1286 of 2020.
M.A. NO. 1292/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Telangana Southern
Power Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TSSPDCL). The
22
prayers made in this M.A. are similar to those made
in M.A. No. 1286 of 2020.
M.A. NO. 1331/2020
This M.A. has been filed by the Telangana Power
Generation Corporation Ltd. (TSGENCO). The prayers
made in the application are similar to prayers made
in M.A. No.1286 of 2020.
M.A. NO. 1291/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Telangana State
Northern Power Distribution Corporation Ltd.
(TSNPDCL). The prayers made in the application are
similar as made in M.A. No.1286 of 2020.
M.A. NO. 1289/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Transmission
Corporation of Telangana Ltd. (TSTRANSCO). The
applicants’ case is that they have been working
throughout in the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh.
The applicants’ names have been included in the list
of 584 employees allocated by Andhra Pradesh power
utilities to be allocated to Telangana power
23
utilities. In pursuance of the Supplementary Report,
the applicants claimed to be relieved w.e.f.
14.03.2020 but were not permitted to join by
Telangana power utilities. The list of 584 employees
submitted by Andhra Pradesh power utilities have been
approved by One-Man Committee in the Concluding
Report dated 20.06.2020. The applicants prayed that
Supplementary report and Concluding Report be
modified and revised directing the respondents to
accommodate the applicants in Andhra Pradesh power
utilities.
M.A. NO. 1293/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Telangana Electricity
Engineers Association & Ors. The applicants take
exception to the Concluding Report of the One-Man
Committee. The applicants prayed that allocation be
restricted till Supplementary Report only by
rejecting the Concluding Report. In the M.A.
applicants prayed for confirmation of allocation of
1157 employees and 242 employees made by One-Man
Committee Report dated 26.12.2019. The applicants
also had pleaded that the Final Report, Supplementary
24
Report and Concluding Report are contradictory to
each other and are irreconcilable to the extent it
goes beyond 1157 employees.
M.A.DIARY NO. 16612/2020
This M.A. Diary has been filed by Ande Jagdish
and three other Engineers seeking a direction to
TSTRANSCO and APTRANSCO to pay pension/salary to the
applicants. The applicants seek direction to
implement the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 of
the One-Man Committee. The applicant also prays for
being impleaded in Civil Appeal No.11435/2018.
M.A. NO. 1631/2020
This M.A. has been filed by L. Praveenkumar Reddy
and seven other Engineers praying for a direction to
Andhra Pradesh and Telangana State utilities not to
give effect the direction No.I of the Concluding
Report submitted by One-Man Committee. The
applicants also prayed for a direction to A.P. power
utilities to retain the applicants as per their
options.
25
M.A. DIARY NO.19295/2020
This M.A. Diary No.19295 of 2020 has been filed
by Kesana Babu Rao & 36 Ors., who claimed to be
employees continued in services on the rolls of
TSGENCO till 04.01.2020 where after they were
relieved in pursuance of Final Report dated
26.12.2019 of the One-Man Committee. The applicants
claimed that they have been denied payment of certain
amounts like SGP Increments, Annual Increments,
Generation Incentives, House Rent Allowance,
Conveyance allowance, Promotions and Promotion
increments, 24x7 power supply increments etc. The
applicants claimed that their further re-allotment,
who presently stand allotted to Andhra Pradesh Power
Generation Corporation Limited as per the Final
Report dated 26.12.2019, the Supplementary Report
dated 11.03.2020 and the Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020 of the One-Man Committee.
M.A. DIARY NO.19982/2020
26
This application has been filed by J.V.V. Suresh
Kumar and Others seeking similar prayers as made in
M.A. Diary No.19295 of 2020.
16. We have heard Shri Mukul Rohtagi, Shri Rakesh
Dwivedi, Shri V. Giri, Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned
senior counsel appearing for the Telangana State
power utilities. Shri Neeraj Kishan Kaul, learned
senior counsel has appeared on behalf of Andhra
Pradesh power utilities. Shri Dushyant Dave, learned
senior counsel has appeared for Telangana Electricity
Engineers Association. We have also heard Shri R.
Balasubramanian and Shri P.V. Surendranath, learned
senior counsel. Shri Ravi Shankar Jindhiyala and
other learned counsel appearing for the parties.
17. We now proceed to notice the submissions advanced
by learned senior counsel appearing for Telangana
power utilities. It is submitted that under the
judgment of this Court dated 28.11.2018 in Civil
Appeal No.11435/2018, One-Man Committee had to
confine the allocation to 1157 employees only. In
the Final Report dated 26.12.2019, out of 1157
27
employees, 655 were allocated to Andhra Pradesh power
utilities and 502 to Telangana State power utilities
and after allocation, no further steps were required
to be taken by One-Man Committee regarding further
allocation. The One-Man Committee has exceeded the
mandate of this Court vide order dated 24.01.2020 and
substantially expanded the exercise of allocation of
employees by giving completely go-bye to Final Report
dated 26.12.2019 and modalities finalised. The ratio
of 3552:2550 as given in the Concluding Report with
regard to employees of Andhra Pradesh power utilities
and Telangana power utilities respectively is not
prescribed by Government Order Nos. 24, 25 and 26
except in respect of headquarter posts. The number
of total employees, i.e., 6102 as mentioned in the
Concluding Report is erroneous. The figure of 6102
employees does not take into account the employees
working in two distribution companies of Telangana,
i.e., TSSPDCL and TSNPDCL. The Telangana State power
utilities were already allocated 502 out of
1157+242+71 employees as per Supplementary Report and
addition of further 584 employees as per the
Concluding Report is excessive and uncalled for. The
28
Concluding Report of the One-Man Committee has given
a complete go-bye to the modalities, which were
formulated and approved by this Court. One-Man
Committee erred in accepting the stand of Andhra
Pradesh power utilities that allocation of 655
employees proposed by Telangana State power utilities
should be on a condition of reciprocity by the
Telangana State utilities in accepting equal number
of 655 employees from Andhra Pradesh power utilities.
Reciprocity was not prescribed in the modalities
given by One-Man Committee as approved by this Court.
One-Man Committee erred in deviating from modalities
by issuing the Concluding Report and allocation of
employees as per principle of “financial neutrality”
and “balancing of employees”. The direction given in
the Supplementary Report was to identify 584
employees out of 2165 among those who fulfil the
modality No.V alone. In the list of 584 employees
proposed by Andhra Pradesh power utilities, there are
only 170 employees, who are from the list of 2165
employees. The selection of 584 employees, thus, was
beyond list of 2165, which was contrary to the
Supplementary Report itself. Even the Concluding
29
Report is not final and was an open-ended report. As
per the Concluding Report, direction was given to
Sub-Committee Member of the Andhra Pradesh to further
delete the names as per direction Nos.I, II and III
and in fact after the Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020 Sub-Committee Member from Andhra Pradesh
has released another list on 26.06.2020 by deleting
119 employees from the list of 655 employees
allocated to Andhra Pradesh and deleted 50 employees
out of 484 list of employees and further added 10
more employees to be allocated to Telangana State on
spouse ground. The report dated 20.06.2020, thus,
was not even a final report and finality of the
allocation was permitted to be unsettled by A.P.
power utilities. The allocation exercise as per the
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 is arbitrary being
contrary to the orders of this Court and also
contrary to the modalities framed by One-Man
Committee and the earlier reports, i.e., Final Report
dated 26.12.2019 and Supplementary Report dated
11.03.2020. It is further submitted by learned
senior counsel that the Telangana State is both
geographically as well as on population basis smaller
30
State as compared to residuary State of Andhra
Pradesh. Against allocation of 655 employees to the
Andhra Pradesh power utilities, from Andhra Pradesh
power utilities to Telangana State power utilities
502+242+71+584 = 1399 employees have been allocated.
Learned senior counsel for the applicants referring
to figures as given in M.A. No. 1286/2020 in
paragraph (e) and (f) submits that post allocation,
total number of employees in Telangana State power
utilities are 5115 whereas in Andhra Pradesh power
utilities was only 3552.
18. Shri Neeraj Kishan Kaul, learned senior counsel
appearing for Andhra Pradesh power utilities refuting
the submissions of the learned counsel for the
applicants contends that the Concluding Report
submitted by One-Man Committee is not beyond the
remit of this Court. One-Man Committee has not gone
beyond the orders of this Court. One-Man Committee
has prepared a Supplementary Report as well as
Concluding Report taking into consideration all
modalities finalised by the One-Man Committee. It is
submitted that Government Order Nos. 24, 25 and 26
31
dated 29.05.2014 were not subject matter of challenge
either before the High Court or this Court and all
the parties had agreed to abide by the said
Government Orders. In terms of Government Orders,
ratio of employees of Telangana State and Andhra
Pradesh is 2550:3552. The figures given by
applicants in their M.A. No.1286/2020 in paragraphs
(e) and (f) are the figures, which are not correct
and have never been placed before the One-Man
Committee. The applicants are endeavouring to re-open
all issues of allocation by means of this M.A.
whereas under the orders of this Court dated
28.11.2018, the report of One-Man Committee was
binding on both the power utilities. The Telangana
State power utilities by one or other means right
from very beginning have been harping only on
principle of nativity, which was specifically
disapproved by the High Court. The submission of the
applicant that the allocation exercise was to confine
only to 1157 employees is not correct. Although, it
is true that before the High Court, the challenge was
to the unilaterally relieved 1157 by Telangana State
power utilities and this Court in its judgment dated
32
28.11.2018 has also observed that One-Man Committee
would determine the modalities for distributing the
personnel, i.e., the aforesaid 1157 employees. This
Court has clarified that in case dispute persists in
respect of other employees of these Power Utility
Companies to the two States, it would be open to the
respective States/Power Utility Companies to bring
the same before the said Committee. It is, thus,
clear that the remit of the One-Man Committee was not
confined to 1157 employees only. In view of the
dispute submitted before the One-Man Committee, the
allocation of all allocated employees was open for
consideration. Shri Kaul submits that population
ratio has to be basis of allocation. He has referred
to Section 2(h) and Section 53 of the Andhra Pradesh
Reorganisation Act, 2014. It is further submitted
that three Government Order Nos.24, 25 and 26 dated
29.05.2014 referred to population ratio, hence, the
said ratio could not have been ignored while
allocating. It is submitted that the Andhra Pradesh
power utilities had not raised any objection with
regard to modalities formulated by the One-Man
Committee. The entire dispute arose out of
33
unilaterally relieving of 1157 employees by Telangana
State power utilities to Andhra Pradesh power
utilities on the basis of nativity, which action was
struck down by the High Court and confirmed by this
Court. It is submitted that while submitting Final
Report dated 26.12.2019, One-Man Committee had only
approved list of 655 employees submitted by Telangana
State power utilities to be allocated to Andhra
Pradesh power utilities but no reciprocal allocation
from Andhra Pradesh power utilities to Telangana
power utilities was undertaken. At that stage, Andhra
Pradesh power utilities had come before this Court by
filing M.A. and this Court on 24.01.2020 permitted
the parties to go back to the One-Man Committee to
represent for correction of errors. Supplementary
Report dated 11.03.2020 was given to correct the
balance. The Sub-Committee Members of Andhra Pradesh
was entrusted to select 584 names to be allocated to
Telangana State power utilities, since Telangana
State Power Utilities has already agreed to accept 71
cases relating to spouse and medical grounds. Thus,
total allocation contemplated from Andhra Pradesh
power utilities to Telangana State power utilities
34
was 655, i.e., 71+584. It is submitted that the case
of the applicant that out of 1157 employees 502 were
allocated to Telangana State power utilities and 655
to Andhra Pradesh power utilities is without any
basis. When a list of 1157 employees unilaterally
relieved by Telangana State power utilities was
struck down by the High Court, all those 1157
continued to be part of Telangana State power
utilities, only allocation was of 655 by Final Report
from Telangana State power utilities to Andhra
Pradesh power utilities. The figure of 502 is
unnecessary being claimed and pressed by applicants
to confuse the issue. Further, 242 employees were
also not covered by any part of allocation by One-Man
Committee. 242 is number where employees working in
Andhra Pradesh power utilities, who got them selfrelieved and joined Telangana State power utilities
on their own. Telangana State power utilities had
accepted joining of 242 self-relieved employees, it
is their burden to shoulder. The allocation, which
has been finalised by One-Man Committee is those of
655 from Telangana State power utilities to Andhra
Pradesh power utilities and 655 from Andhra Pradesh
35
power utilities to Telangana State power utilities.
Members of Sub-Committee of Andhra Pradesh power
utilities were rightly asked to submit a list of 584
members, which are proposed to be allocated to
Telangana State power utilities, since 71 out of 655
were already accepted by Telangana. The submission
that 484 are not from the list of 2165 has also been
dealt with by One-Man Committee in the Final Report.
Selection of 584 from Andhra Pradesh power utilities
to Telangana State power utilities were not to be
based on only nativity whereas list of 2165, which
was placed before One-Man Committee was the list of
those employees, who had indicated their hometown as
territory of Telangana State. Modality (V), which
requires the consideration of option of employees for
adjusting them in the State in which their home
district falls as far as possible. There was no
mandate in the modalities or under law to allocate
employees to his/their home district. All modalities
including the option and seniority were to be
considered while finalising the allocation. The list
of 655 employees was earlier submitted by Telangana
State power utilities and approved by One-Man
36
Committee in Final Report dated 26.12.2019. The
Andhra Pradesh power utilities were also entitled to
select 655 to be sent to Telangana State power
utilities. After the Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020, further deletion and addition from the
two lists was consequential in pursuance of direction
Nos. I and II. With regard to direction No.III,
there was no addition or subtraction. Direction Nos.
I and II were issued by One-Man Committee in the ends
of justice to adjust the equities for which no
exception can be taken by the applicants. In the
Supplementary Report in paragraph 21, it was already
noticed that parties have agreed that all retired
employees between years 2014 to 2020 in each power
utility in each State need not be displaced only for
pensioner benefits payable to them. The direction
No.I was in accord to the aforesaid agreement between
the parties with only modification that the aforesaid
direction has been extended to employees, who are
going to retire on 31.12.2020. The above direction
protects the financial interest of both the States as
well as the employees. One-Man Committee, which has
been empowered to take a final decision regarding
37
allocation was fully entitled to seek any further
direction looking to the fact that the allocation
process has taken considerable time and some further
adjustments were required to be made by the One-Man
Committee.
19. Shri Dushyant Dave, learned senior counsel
appearing for the Telangana Electricity Engineers
Association submits that One-Man Committee has
travelled outside the limits of both the Concluding
Report and Supplementary Report and are not correct.
It is submitted that allocation in Telangana State
power utilities being excessive the prospect of
promotion of Engineers working in Telangana are
affected. The Telangana State power utilities have
been over burdened with a large number of employees,
which is contrary to the spirit of Andhra Pradesh
Reorganisation Act, 2014 and prospect from the
employees hailing from the Telangana is affected.
20. Shri Balasubramanian, learned senior counsel
appearing for APSPDCL relieved employees contends
that the distribution business of Anantapur and
38
Kurnool Districts of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Central
Power Distribution Company Ltd. was merged with
Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution
Corporation Ltd. by G.O. No.24 dated 29.05.2014 and
in fact those employees were not subject to any
further allocation. He submits that the names of the
applicants were not included in the Final Report
dated 26.12.2019 but now it has come in the
Supplementary Report and the Concluding Report, which
deserves to be set aside.
21. Shri P.V. Surendranath, learned senior counsel
submits that One-Man Committee has not taken into
consideration the judgment of this Court in Telangana
Judges Association Vs. Union of India, (2018) SCC
Online SC 1729, which was referred to by this Court
in its judgment dated 28.11.2018 deciding the Civil
Appeal No.11435/2018. He further submits that in
Supplementary Report modalities earlier finalised
have been obliterated.
22. Shri Ravi Shankar Jindhiyala, learned counsel
appearing in M.A. Diary No. 13844 of 2020 submits
39
that the applicants are senior most employees and
they were relieved from Telangana State power
utilities to Andhra Pradesh power utilities, they are
not being paid salary citing direction No. I of
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020.
23. We have considered the submissions of the learned
counsel for the parties and have perused the records.
24. Before we enter into the submissions of learned
counsel for the parties, it is necessary to consider
the scope of these miscellaneous applications qua the
One-Man Committee’s Report. In order dated
28.11.2018 passed by this Court appointing One Man’s
Committee, this Court made clear that decision of the
One-Man Committee shall be final and binding on the
all the parties including Power Utility Companies of
the two States. relevant part of the order is as
follows:-
“We make it clear that the decision of
the one man Committee head by Justice
Dharmadhikari shall be final and binding
on all the parties including Power Utility
Companies of the two States as well as the
40
employees and shall be executed by all the
parties as an order of this Court.”
25. While disposing of the appeal, this Court,
however, made following observations:-
“However, in case, any clarification or
further direction is required by any of
the parties they are entitled to approach
this Court by filing interlocutory
application in these proceedings.”
26. The liberty granted to parties to seek
clarification or further direction was with object to
complete the process of distributing the personnel
between two States. There was no right of appeal
given to any of the parties or any officer or
employee against the report of One-Man Committee.
The power utilities of both the States having not
been able to arrive at any consensus to finally
determine the modalities to distribute the personnel
between two States, this Court constituted One-Man
Committee to decide the dispute. When this Court
clearly directed as noted above that decision of OneMan Committee shall be final and binding on all the
parties including power utility companies as well as
the employees, the decision of the One-Man Committee
41
has to be given due weight and cannot be lightly
interfered with. The scope of these miscellaneous
applications is, thus, very limited and by these
miscellaneous applications, the power utilities of
both the States cannot be allowed to seek reexamination of various issues, which were raised
before One-Man Committee.
27. As noted above, it is Section 82 of the Andhra
Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, which deals with
employees of public sector undertaking. The key
words in Section 82 are “the corporate body concerned
shall determine the modalities for distributing the
personnel between the two successor States”. The
High Court in its impugned judgment dated 02.02.2018
while answering point No.2 framed by the High Court
had observed in paragraph 51:-
“51. For the foregoing reasons, we hold
point No.1 in the negative and against the
Telangana State Government and the
Telangana State power utilities. Under
point No.2, we hold that the phrase
“corporate body concerned” shall be read
as “corporate bodies concerned” and the
words “between the two successor States”
have to be construed as “two successor
corporations/companies.”
42
28. Thus, as per the statutory Scheme delineated by
Section 82, the power utilities themselves were
contemplated to determine the modalities for
distributing the personnel between two successor
corporations/companies. It was due to failure of
power utilities of both the States to arrive at a
consensus and after unilateral decision of power
utilities of Telangana to relieve 1157 employees from
Telangana to Andhra Pradesh merely on the ground of
nativity, the litigation started in the High Court by
filing various writ petitions. The reference of three
Government Orders, which were issued by erstwhile
State of Andhra Pradesh on 29.05.2014, which has been
referred to and relied by One-Man Committee also need
to be noted. Government Order No. 24 dated
29.05.2014 was issued by Government of Andhra
Pradesh, which Government Order states:-
“ENERGY (CC) DEPARTMENT
G.O.Ms.No. 24. Dated: 29-05-2014
As the two districts of Ananthapur and
Kurnool fall within the residual state of
AP, in accordance with Schedule XII of
Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act 2014, it
is necessary to reassign the distribution
business of these two districts to the
43
present APSPDCL from APCPDCL. The assets
and liabilities shall be reassigned to
APSPDCL as per the Section 53 of the Act.
To facilitate the reassignment of the
distribution business of the two districts
of Ananthapur and Kurnool to APSPDCL as
per the Act, following guidelines are
issued.
I. Effective Date/Appointed Date: The
Effective/Appointed date for transfer
of the business is 02.06.2014.
II. Employees: All the employees working
in Kurnool and Ananthapur circles on
the appointed day will continue to
work in the same places till the final
allotment of employees to the
respective DISCOMS is completed in
accordance with guidelines to be
issued by government separately in
this regard. Their salaries will be
paid by APCPDCL and reimbursed by
APSPDCL on monthly basis till the
final allotment is completed.
Provisional allocation of staff will
be done as per State Government
guidelines.”
29. Another Government Order being G.O. No.25 dated
29.05.2014 was issued for allocation of AP GENCO for
Telangana, the posts and staff to be transferred to
the newly created Telangana GENCO was to be in
accordance with the Guidelines contained therein.
All sanctioned posts for Telangana Region Projects
located in Telangana State shall stand transferred to
Telangana GENCO w.e.f. effective date. Paragraph 6
44
of the Government Order dealt with allocation of
sanctioned technical posts at Head Quarters and
allocation of sanctioned common services posts at
Head Quarters. Another Government Order No.26 dated
29.05.2014 was issued containing Guidelines on
separate creation of TRANSCO for Telangana State. In
paragraph 5 of the Government Order, which deals with
transfer of posts to TG TRANSCO, following was
stated:-
“5.Transfer of posts to TG TRANSCO: All
the posts related to District, Field and
Zonal offices including Central Training
Institute at Hyderabad located in
Telangana State shall stand transferred to
TG TRANSCO with effect from Effective
date. Posts at AP TRANSCO Head Quarter
shall be divided between two Transcos
based on population ratio of respective
state. Based on this principle, head
quarter posts transferred to TG TRANSCO is
listed in Annexure- C.”
30. The above three Government Orders, which were
issued with regard to these power distribution
companies, generation and transmission were relevant
for the subject. There was no challenge to the
aforesaid Government Orders either before the High
Court or before this Court. In paragraph 39 of the
45
judgment of the High Court, following was observed by
the High Court:-
“39. A doubt would arise as to when the
State Government has no power for
distribution of the personnel between the
two successor bodies, whether it has the
power to distribute the posts. Neither of
the successor States nor the successor
power utilities have challenged the
validity of these G.Os., allocating the
posts among the successor power utilities.
Even during the hearing, neither of the
two Advocates General has either taken the
stand that there was no allocation of the
posts, nor advanced any submission against
such allocation. Therefore, there could be
no impediment for the allocation of the
employees based on the allocation of the
posts made in the aforementioned G.Os. In
the alternative, if the joint committee of
the power utilities feel that amendments
or adjustments to the allocation of posts
made under the aforementioned three GOs
are necessary, they shall be free to do so
based on the consensus.”
31. As noted above, the judgment of the High Court
was upheld by this Court in its judgment dated
28.11.2018. Now, we need to notice the modalities,
which were finalised by One-Man Committee. on
17.04.2019, final modalities to the following effect
were finalised by One-Man Committee:-
“(I) All Identifiable allocable employees.
46
I. All State Cadre Employees of
the rank of Assistant Engineer
and equivalent post and above.
II. All posts at the Head Quarters
of APEGENCO, APTRANSCO and D!
SCOMs falling within the
territory of the two States
are allocable.
(II) All identified allocable employees in
Power utilities of united Andhra
Pradesh (including 1157 unilaterally
relieved by Telangana + 229
unilaterally allowed to join by
Telangana) will be considered for
final allocation to the new States of
Andhra Pradesh and Telangana on "as
is where is basis" on the appointed
day on 2.6.2014 in accordance with
the provisions of Section 82 of the
Act of 2014.
(III) The allocation of employees to the
two new States would be Power
Utility-wise (i.e GENCO, TRANSCO and
DISCOMs) in proportion to the posts
sanctioned in each Power Utility and
in accordance with G.O.Ms No. 24 for
DISCOMs and G.OMs No.25 for GENCO and
G.O.Ms No.26 for TRANSCO issued by
Energy (CC Department) of Govcrn1ncnt
of Andhra Pradesh under section 53 of
the Act of 2014.
(IV) The allocable employees will have
liberty to give options in the
prescribed form Annexed to the
present modalities. However, the
employees who have already exercised
options, will not be allowed again to
sub1nit options for a different place
or location in any of the two States.
The opportunity of submitting option
in the prescribed form would be
47
available only to such employees who
have not submitted their options
earlier.
(V) The allocable employees would, as far
as possible, after consideration of
their options be adjusted in the
State in which their Home District
falls as per the information
contained in their service records
and obtained from them through the
information available and provided by
them in their written
representations.
(VI) The Provisional Allocation list after
preparation will be displayed on the
Notice Board of the Head Quarters of
each Power Utility and also put on
the website and other electronic
sites for information of the
employees. The employees may take up
their written representations within
three weeks from the date of the
optics for proposed allocation.
(VII) Representations of the employees in
respect of proposed allocation shall
be duly considered by Two Member Sub
Committee comprising One Member each
of the Power Utilities within the
area of AP and TS. After considering
the representations of the employees
by the Sub Con1n1ittce, the proposed
Allocation List will be submitted to
the One Man Committee.
(VIII) The employees of the category of
SCs and STs shall as far as possible,
be allotted to the appropriate
·company in the State in which the
concerned SC or ST employee is
notified as such in accordance with
the Constitutional Provisions.
48
(IX) Case of alleviation of extreme
personal hardship of State Government
employees will be exceptions to the
principle. It would be open to
Committee to consider the
representation or request of
allocation on case to case basis.
(X) Widowed Female employees legally
separated and divorced women
employees will be considered for
allocation to the State, basing on
their request for allotment. It would
be open to the committee to consider
the representation or request of
allocation on case to case basis.
(XI) Handicapped persons of more than 60%
disability may be allocated on the
basis of option, subject to the
procedure prescribed by the State
Government. It would be open to the
con11nittee to consider the
representations or request of
allocation on case to case basis.
(XII) An employee of whose spouse or child
is known to be facing serious medical
hardship, like in cases of cancer,
open heart bypass, and kidney
transplant/kidney failure dependent
on dialysis or mentally challenged,
shall be considered for allotment on
special grounds on the basis of
request of allotment, subject to
strict proof of verification as per
the procedure prescribed by the State
Government. It would be open to the
committee to consider the
representation or request of
allocation on case to case basis.
(XIII) In spouse cases, where the employee
of the Spouse working in State
Government, Central Government, State
49
Government institutions, Local
Bodies, the following guidelines may
be adopted. It would be open to the
Committee to consider the
representation or request of
allocation on case to case basis.
(I) Allocation of both spouses
may be considered for the
state to which both of them
are native.
(II) In case where one of them is
working in State Power
Utilities and other is
working 1n PSU /Defence
Organizations/ Railways/
Banking and Insurance
Sectors/Central Government/
State Government, the said
cases may be considered on
case to case basis.
(III) Spouses who belong to
different States (AP /TS)
may be allocated together
as per their request to one
State.
(XIV) All the employees who have retired/
died after the Appointed Day and the
pensioners shall be allotted as per
the above formulated modalities.”
32. The modality No.(III) as above provides that the
allocation of employees to the two new States would
be Power Utility-wise in proportion to the posts
sanctioned in each Power Utility and in accordance
with G.O.Ms Nos. 24, 25 and 26. The modality No.(IV)
50
provided for a liberty to allocable employees to give
options in the prescribed form. Modality NO.(II)
also contemplate that all identified allocable
employees in Power utilities of united Andhra Pradesh
will be considered for final allocation to the new
States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana on "as is
where is basis" on the appointed day on 2.6.2014.
The One-Man Committee had also constituted a SubCommittee consisting of one representative of power
utilities of Andhra Pradesh and one representative of
power utilities of Telangana to assist One-Man
Committee in finalising the distribution. After
framing of the modalities, One-Man Committee
proceeded with the task. The member of Sub-Committee
of Telangana utilities had submitted a list of 655
employees out of 1157 earlier unilaterally relieved
by Telangana power utilities to be allocated to
Andhra Pradesh utilities. One-Man Committee submitted
a Final Report dated 26.12.2019 alongwith which final
allocation list for the two States’
corporations/companies wise was annexed. The list of
655 employees, which was proposed by Sub-Committee
Member of Telangana was approved to be allocated to
51
different power utilities of Andhra Pradesh. The
Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Ltd.
filed application being M.A. No.60 of 2020 in this
Court seeking certain direction with regard to Final
Report dated 26.12.2019, copy of M.A. No.60 of 2020
has been brought on record as Annexure R-10 to the
common counter affidavit filed on behalf of
respondent. One of the issues raised in the
application was that although One-Man committee has
approved the list of 655 employees allocating them to
Andhra Pradesh power utilities but no allocation was
made in respect of 3517 allocable employees working
on order to serve basis in Andhra Pradesh power
utilities. In paragraph 4c, d and e following has
been pleaded:-
“c. That the names of the 3517 state cadre
allocable employees working in AP Power
utilities are not found any mention in the
final report dated 26-12-2019.
d. Moreover, an additional 655 employees
were unlawfully thrust upon the AP power
utilities over and above the allocable
posts available with AP power utilities.
e. That because of the above omission,
there is an inward transfer of additional
655 employees from Telangana to AP over
and above the 3517 employees, who are
already working on order to serve basis
52
and there is no outward transfer of any
employees from AP to Telangana. the
obvious result is that instead of the
allocation of all 6102 allocable employees
in percentages between the two States as
given in the GO Ms. 24, 25 and 26, the
ratio has now skewed more towards AP
because of the proposed inward transfer.
In other words, AP is being forced to
absorb in excess of the allocable posts
mandated by the Reorganisation Act as well
as the binding G.O.s.”
33. M.A. No. 60 of 2020 was disposed of by this Court
by order dated 24.01.2020 where this Court made
following observations:-
“This Court by the final judgment
having entrusted the work of allocation to
one man committee, as agreed by parties,
the modalities finalized by one man
committee is binding on all, to which,
there is no dissension between the
parties. There being no dispute regarding
modalities, in event, there is some error
or mistake in the working of the
modalities that can be pointed out to the
same committee by means of a
representation and we hope and trust that
the committee shall look into the said
grievance and correct the error, if any.
We also make it clear that if the
representation is submitted by the
applicant, copy of the same shall be given
to the power utilities of both the Sates,
who may also have liberty to submit a
response to those representation, which
may be considered by the one man
committee. The representation be submitted
within two weeks and response thereto be
also submitted within two weeks
thereafter.”
53
34. After the order dated 24.01.2020, One-Man
Committee heard the Andhra Pradesh power utilities,
which made a representation to One-Man Committee to
rectify the list. A reply was also submitted by
Telangana State power utilities. On 23.02.2020, the
One-Man Committee held a meeting for consideration of
the representation. In pursuance of the
deliberations, T.S. power utilities submitted their
proposals for accommodating 71 employees on spouse
and medical grounds. on 11.03.2020, One-Man
Committee issued a Supplementary Report. In the
Supplementary Report, One –Man Committee noted that
655 employees, who were allocated from T.S. power
utilities to A.P. power utilities have already been
relieved. One-Man Committee has further observed
that to complete the allocation process
comprehensively by including all allocable employees
alongwith 1157 ex-parte relieved, a separate exercise
has been undertaken. One-Man Committee noted that
with regard to 71 employees from A.P. power utilities
to Telangana State power utilities both the parties
have agreed and the list of 71 employees was annexed
54
alongwith the Report. Paragraphs 21, 22, 23 and 27
of the Supplementary Report, which are relevant, are
to the following effect:-
“21. It was also agreed by the Parties
that all retired employees between years
2014 to 2020 in each Power Utility in each
State need not be displaced only for
pensioner benefits payable to them.
22. On the basis of the Allocation Lists
proposed by AP Power Utilities, the
present Committee has identified and
listed in Annexed lists with the present
Supplementary Report, total 2165 employees
which include 1157 earlier relieved and
were working on the side of Telangana on
the basis of the stay orders of the High
Court and Hon’ble Supreme Court. Those
employees continued to serve in TS
Companies on the basis of the order of the
Court. Out of above mentioned 1157 the
employees, numbering 655 have been
relieved by TS for AP Companies who are
awaiting joining, posting and payments of
their salaries.
23. The present Committee in the lists
annexed to the present Supplementary
Report has identified total 2165 employees
as suitable for allocation to TS Companies
on the basis of the Modalities agreed by
the parties and approved by Supreme Court.
The breakup of employees presently
working in AP Companies which are
identified as suitable for allocation to
TS Companies are as under:-
COMPANIES EMPLOYEES IN
NUMBER
TRANSCO 993
TSGENCO 1125
55
TSSPDCL 47
TOTAL 2165
27. The present Committee is entrusting
the work to the member of the SubCommittee representing AP side, of
identification of 584 employees from the
lists Annexed to the Supplementary Report
of the Committee for Allocating them from
AP Power Utilities to TS Power Utilities.
It needs mention that the abovementioned
584 employees should be other than 655
employees out of earlier relieved 1157 and
who are awaiting orders of joining,
posting and payment of salary from Andhra
Pradesh Side.”
35. The One-Man Committee further issued certain
clarification on 13.03.2020 on receipt of the letter
dated 12.03.2020 on behalf of Telangana State power
utilities. After the issue of Supplementary Report,
Sub-Committee Member of Andhra Pradesh power
utilities submitted a letter dated 12.03.2020
submitting a list of 584 persons identified as per
Supplementary Report dated 11.03.2020 to be allocated
to Telangana power utilities. Telangana power
utilities has raised objections regarding list of 584
employees and also filed a Miscellaneous Application
No.920 of 2020. This Court disposed of the M.A.
No.920 of 2020 with the observation that objection
56
with regard to 584 employees raised by Telangana
power utilities are to be considered by One-Man
Committee. Various employees sent different
representations to power utilities as well as to the
One-Man Committee. One-Man Committee issued a
direction dated 11.05.2020 directing both the sides
to consider representations received from the
employees effectively and send their revised proposed
allocations. The Sub-Committee Member of Andhra
Pradesh submitted a letter dated 26.05.2020 revising
the list of 584 persons to be allocated to Telangana
State power utilities. The list submitted by letter
dated 26.05.2020 was objected by Telangana power
utilities by their letter dated 10.06.2020. After
considering the list submitted by Sub-Committee
Member of Andhra Pradesh and the objection of
Telangana, Concluding Report has been submitted by
One-Man Committee dated 20.06.2020.
36. In M.A. No. 1286 of 2020, learned counsel for the
applicants in paragraphs E and F has given certain
figures regarding allocation as per Report dated
26.12.2019 and as per Report dated 20.06.2020.
57
Applicants have also disputed the number of allocable
employees as claimed by Andhra Pradesh power
utilities. The number of allocable employees as
claimed on behalf of the Andhra Pradesh power
utilities, i.e., 6102 has been questioned in the
application. It is submitted that allocable
employees were not 6102 but were much more. It has
been claimed that as per Concluding Report, Telangana
State power utilities have now been allocated 5115
employees and Andhra Pradesh power utilities have
been allocated 3552 employees, thus, as per claim of
the applicants by final Concluding Report actually
8667 employees have been allocated. The above
figures have been stoutly refuted by learned counsel
appearing for the Andhra Pradesh power utilities
submitting that figures, which are now sought to be
claimed in the application by applicant was never
placed before the One-Man Committee and the figures
given by the applicants are all imaginary and needs
no consideration. It is submitted by the respondent
that endeavour of the applicants is to confuse the
issue by giving all wrong figures.
58
37. To satisfy ourselves with regard to figures of
allocable employees, which were placed before the
One-Man Committee, we have looked into the claim of
respective parties as was placed before the One-Man
Committee. In letter dated 26.05.2020, Annexure R-19
to the common counter affidavit, details relating to
allocable employees as per three Government Orders
were mentioned as 6102. In paragraphs 9 and 18,
following has been stated:-
“9. The stated stand of the AP utilities
has been as mentioned in the above order
dated 01.05.2020 passed by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India is that ratios as
per GOs be maintained, i.e., out of 6102
“allocable” employees. 3552 is the
threshold limit of Andhra Pradesh
Utilities and 2550 is threshold limit of
Telangana Power Utilities. The said
numbers are sacrosanct and cannot be
altered. The committee was constituted
and empowered to consider allocation of
all allocable employees and was not
limited to 1157 employees as was and
continued to be contended by Telangana
Utilities. Further the Telangana Utilities
continue to seek allocation of "Nativity"
principle. Both the stands of the
Telangana Utilities have been rejected
which is the essence of AP Reorganization
Act, 2014 read with Modalities finalized
by the Hon'ble One Man Committee. Secondly
the allocation will be strictly in
accordance with the GOs and all other
modalities to be applied on case to case
basis; as far as possible. It is most
humbly submitted that, while identifying
59
the 655 that were allotted to AP
utilities, the Telangana Utilities have
not applied any scientific mechanism or
the modalities but is based primarily on
the “Nativity/Home district” Principle:
whereas identification of 584 employees by
A.P. Utilities is based on objective
criteria contained in the working
modalities, aided by the DoPT guidelines
and is in accordance with the directions
of the courts in this regard. The
identification of personnel on cadre basis
has been carried out such that the 655
employees are balanced with (584+71) so
that financial neutrality is maintained.
18. That, at very outset it is submitted
that TS Power Utilities are again seeking
to reopen the whole allocation. There is
an all-out attempt to confuse the numbers
and thus for clarity, the numbers are
explained hereunder.
18.1 Total Number of Allocable Employees
is 6102 as on 02.06.2014.
18.2 Ratios as laid down by the
provisions of the AP Reorganization
Act and the binding GOs as per the
modalities is Andhra Pradesh power
utilities: Telangana power utilities
= 3552:2550.
18.3 As on 02.06.2014 employees working
on order to serve with Andhra
Pradesh utilities are 3552 and
similarly employees working on order
to serve with Telangana Utilities
are 2550.
18.4 Final Report dated 26.12.2019
allocated 3552 (already working on
order to serve) plus additional 655
making total of 4207 to AP utilities
and reduced the number of employees
60
in Telangana utilities to 1895,
thus, skewing the balance and
disrupting the ratios under the GOs.
18.5 Citing the mismatch of ratios i.e.,
3552:2550 for which AP utilities had
approached Hon'ble Supreme Court
vide their clarification petition
vide MA Nos. 60, 61 and 62. Hon'ble
Supreme Court appreciated the errors
in the Allocation and directed the
AP Power Utilities to approach this
Hon'ble Committee for rectification
of errors and application of
Modalities strictly.
18.6 Thus the Hon'ble one man committee
held proceedings at Delhi and by
accepting the doctrine of 'financial
neutrality' vide Supplementary
Report dated 11.03.2020 the above
errors in ratios which had crept in
were corrected and cured and thus
with same ratio as stipulated in GOs
3552:2550 has been restored and 655
allotted to AP are balanced by
corresponding 655 (584 + 71)
allotted to TS.”
38. The claim as made by Sub-Committee Member of the
Andhra Pradesh power utilities was objected by the
applicants and they have filed a detailed letter
dated 10.06.2020 which letter is part of M.A.
No.1270/2020 whereby replying paragraph 9, following
has been stated in paragraph 9.1:-
“9.1. Further, the order dated 1-5-2020 of
the Hon.ble Supreme Court does not refer
to the Government orders or that out of
61
6102 allocable employees, 3552 is the
threshold limit of AP Power Utilities and
2550 is threshold limit of TS Power
Utilities. Such an averment is misleading.
In this regard it is submitted that, the
figures as given by the Member, AP in
Para-9 is incorrect even as per the list
furnished by the AP Power Utilities to the
Hon'ble OMC on 23-02-2020. According to
their own [A.P Power Utilities] Final list
of employees submitted to your Lordship on
23-02-2020 the total allocable employees
are 6198 and not 6102 employees as has
been stated now. In the list of 6198
employees, as was furnished by AP Power
utilities, 2225 employees were found
allocable to TS Power Utilities and 3973
employees to AP Power Utilities. And out
of the 2225 employees found allocable to
TS Power Utilities; the Hon’ble OMC had
identified 2165 employees suitable for
allocation to TS Power Utilities in Para23 of the Supplementary Report dtd: 11-03-
2020. Therefore, the figures as specified
now in Para-9 of the letter dtd:26-05-2020
is incorrect and has been done without any
basis and only with a view to create
confusion and complicate the issue. The
population ratio has no relevancy for
allocation of the employees in terms of
Section 82 of A.P. Reorganization Act,
2014.”
39. The claim made in paragraph 18 of the letter
dated 26.05.2020 was further objected in paragraph 15
of the letter dated 10.06.2020. The Telangana State
power utilities have repeated the same averments,
which have been noted in paragraph 9.1 as above.
From the materials placed by the applicants before
62
the One-Man Committee in response to the claim of
6102 employees allocable on 02.06.2014, no figure of
their own has been submitted by the applicants rather
they only say that Andhra Pradesh power utilities
itself have given a figure of 6198 in place of 6102.
When no materials have been placed before the One-Man
Committee with regard to number of allocable
employees on 02.06.2014, it is not open for the
applicants to give new figures before this Court.
This Court cannot permit the parties to reopen the
number of allocable employees as on 02.01.2020 to
anything contrary, which was not placed before the
One-Man Committee. We, thus, are of the view that
figures, now, sought to be given in M.A. No.1286 of
2020 need to be ignored. We, thus, do not find any
error in the allocations made by the One-Man
Committee in its Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020.
40. We may further observe that the list of 655
employees submitted by Telangana State power
utilities for allocation to Andhra Pradesh power
utilities has been approved by the One-Man Committee
for which there is no dispute. The One-Man Committee
63
has undertaken exercise to identify the list of 655
employees from Andhra Pradesh power utilities to be
transferred to Telangana State power utilities. The
proceeding to balance the number of employees from
Telangana State power utilities to Andhra Pradesh
power utilities being 655, we fail to understand that
how the applicants can raise the issue regarding
number of allocable employees to be considered by
this Court in these proceedings.
41. The submission which has been much pressed by the
learned counsel for the applicants is that number of
employees allocated to Telangana State power
utilities is much more as compared to those which
have been allocated from Telangana State power
utilities to Andhra Pradesh power utilities. The
applicants have repeatedly in their application and
their objection before the One-Man Committee have
referred to 502 out of 1157, 242 self-relieved
employees and 71 spouse and medical cases plus 584
which have been permitted to be identified by Member
of Andhra Pradesh Sub-Committee. The submission is
that 502+242+71+584 becomes 1399, hence 1399 have
64
been allocated to Telangana State power utilities as
against 655, which has been allocated from Telangana
State power utilities to Andhra Pradesh power
utilities. We may need to look into the above
submission on the basis of each figure claimed by the
applicant.
42. Now, coming to figure 502, which according to the
applicant is balance from 1157 by reducing it by 655.
The 502 figure as noted above, 1157 is the number of
persons, which were initially relieved by Telangana
State power utilities to Andhra Pradesh power
utilities unilaterally which decision was set aside
by the High Court and was upheld by this Court. Out
of 1157 only 655 have been allocated to Andhra
Pradesh power utilities, which was approved by Final
Report dated 26.12.2019 of the One-Man Committee.
How allocation of 502 is claimed when they are the
employees, who remained on Telangana State without
they being allocated to Andhra Pradesh power
utilities apart from 655 from Telangana State to
Andhra Pradesh. Further employees working in
Telangana State were allowed to remain in Telangana
65
State, hence, allocation from Telangana State to
Andhra Pradesh is only 655 and addition of 502 is
wholly inappropriate.
43. Now, we come to number 242, which is number of
self-relieved employees from Andhra Pradesh to
Telangana State. Admittedly, 242 employees are,
thus, who got themselves self-relieved from Andhra
Pradesh without there being any order or without
there being any direction by anyone. These 242
employees were permitted joining by Telangana power
utilities by its own. These 242 employees having
never been allocated to nor being part of any
allocation cannot be added in figure by Telangana
State. Now, we come to 71, which is agreed spouse
and medical ground cases by both the parties. 71 is
part of 655, which is now being identified by Andhra
Pradesh to be allocated to Telangana State. By
taking this no.71 in Supplementary Report permitting
Andhra Pradesh to identify only 584, thus, it is only
584+71, i.e., 655 employees, which are now being
sought to be allocated to the Telangana State by OneMan Committee. We, thus, do not find any merit in
66
the contention of the applicant that 1399 employees
have been allocated to Telangana State as against 655
allocated from Telangana State to Andhra Pradesh.
44. Now, another limb of attack of the applicants is
on the selection of 584 employees, which have been
approved by the Concluding Report to be allocated to
the Telangana State. It is submitted by applicants
that in Supplementary Report dated 11.03.2020, the
One-Man Committee has itself stated that there are
2165 employees, who are suitable for allocation to
Telangana State companies, which has also been
noticed in paragraph 23 of the Supplementary Report.
When the Andhra Pradesh Sub-Committee Member vide
letter dated 26.05.2020 has submitted the revised
list of 584, immediately objection was raised by
Telangana State vide letter dated 10.06.2020 raising
an objection that 584 does not form part of 2165 from
which only the A.P. Sub-Committee had to identify
584. Initially by letter dated 12.03.2020, the
Andhra Pradesh Sub-Committee Members have selected
584 employees, which was modified by letter dated
26.05.2020. The reason for modification in the list
67
have been given in letter dated 26.05.2020 of Andhra
Pradesh power utilities. It has been stated that
after Supplementary Report and direction dated
11.05.2020, representations were submitted by the
employees with regard to rest of 584 and One-Man
Committee issued a direction on 11.05.2020 to the
following effect:-
“Due to outbreak of Corona virus and
consequent lock down imposed in India, a
formal personal meeting with the members
of the Sub-Committee for finalizing the
process of allocation does not seem
possible in near future. The dispute now
seems to have narrowed down to 584
employees allocation by AP to TS side.
Both sides are directed to consider the
representations received from the
employees collectively and individually
and send their revised proposed
allocation. Both sides should exchange
their revised allocation Lists limited to
584 employees of AP who presently stand
allocated to TS. The members of the SubCommittee are directed to send their
proposed revised lists latest by 1st June,
2020. As and when normalcy is restored in
the country, if necessary, a formal
personal meeting date will be communicated
to the parties well in advance”.
45. Further in paragraph 13, following has been
stated:-
“13. That the substitution which takes
place in the annexed revised lists is in
terms of directions dated 11.05.2020
68
issued by this Hon'ble Committee and in
terms of orders passed by Hon’ble Supreme
Court. The majority of representations
were of the nature of Special Cases
including spouse cases, medical cases,
physically handicapped cases etc. Their
grievances are addressed and on
humanitarian grounds and substitutions
have been affected strictly as per
modalities. No revised options were
considered in this exercise.”
46. The objection that list of 584 is not out of 2165
was considered by the One-Man Committee, which is
reflected from the Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020. The above objection has been duly
considered and answered by the One-Man Committee in
paragraphs 25, 26, 27 and 28 of the Concluding
Report, which is to the following effect:-
“25. The second submission on behalf of TS
is that with the Supplementary Report,
this Committee had Identified total 2165
employees in the list given to AP Sub
Committee member for proposing allocation
from that list. It is urged on behalf of
TS, that allocation list proposed by AP is
not out of 2165 listed employees with the
Supplementary Report of this Committee.
26. It is true, as urged on behalf of TS,
that with the Supplementary Report, this
Committee had identified 2165 employees
bused on modality Nos. 5 which requires
consideration of every employee for his
home district and his adjustment as far as
possible in the State in which his home
district falls.
69
27. This Committee has to be open to
correction. The Committee is also of the
view that modality No. V alone is not
decisive and modalities no. I to IV are to
be cumulatively taken into consideration
and applied to make allocation in
proportion to the available posts in each
Company in the Two States. TS side has
accepted that 114 employees from out of
584 employees proposed for allocation by
A.P to T.S are included in 2165 employees
identified by this Committee in the lint
annexed with Supplementary Report. The
remaining 470 employees (falling outside
2165 employees identified with the
supplementary report) have been proposed
by A.P for T.S in the report of the Sub
Committee Member. The justification shown
is that it is to match the number of
employees with the available posts in
various companies.
28. In the above circumstances, mentioned
above, this Committee finds the Allocation
Lists company-wise and post-wise proposed
by AP deserves approval and it is so
approved.”
47. One-Man Committee accepted the reasons given by
Sub-Committee Member of Andhra Pradesh that list of
2165 was only considered on the basis of modality
No.V and modality No.V itself cannot be the sole
basis for allocation, hence other modalities were
also taken into consideration before finalising the
list of 584. It is true that in Supplementary Report
dated 11.03.2020, the list of 2165 was indicated as
70
list of suitable persons who are eligible to be
allocated to Telangana State, however, the selection
made of 584 by applying modalities No. I to V by the
Andhra Pradesh Member Sub-Committee has found
approval and even if all members of 584 does not form
part of 2165, no exception can be taken to such
allocation, which find approval by One-Man committee.
We may further notice that insofar as the list of
allocation of 655 employees is concerned, which was
submitted by Telangana State power utilities, was
approved by the One-Man Committee. The task to
select 584 was rightly entrusted by One-Man Committee
to Andhra Pradesh Sub-Committee Member since those
584 has to go to Telangana State from Andhra Pradesh
and those 584, who are working in the territories of
Andhra Pradesh. Andhra Pradesh utilities were the
best suited to select 584 by applying all the
modalities. Thus, the objection raised by the
applicants on selection of 584 having not been
accepted by the One-Man Committee, we see no reason
to take any different view.
48. Now, one more objection of the applicants, which
needs to be noticed is the objection that even the
71
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, which is to the following effect:-
I. In addition to the Directions
contained in Para 21 of the
Supplementary Report of this Committee
regarding retired employees on both
sides, it is further directed, that in
both the States, employees who have
attained or will be attaining 58 Years
of age in the year 2020 will be kept
out of the allocation process and
their names in the Allocation Lists
will be removed.
II. In the allocation process of the
present dimension and undertaken after
5 years delay, it is not possible for
the Committee to satisfy individual
needs and comforts and service
prospects of every employee. The
allocation process has been finalized
on laid down principles contained in
the modalities and elbow room,
wherever permissible, in the
modalities has been given effect to.
The committee however directs the Sub
Committee member of AP to re-examine
any left out spouse and medical cases
and every attempt should be made to
accommodate them in the state of their
option.
III. All SC/ST employees cases be reexamined to accommodate them as per
modality VIII in the State where they
are notified as SCs or STs so as not
to affect their future service growth.
72
49. Now, we first take the direction No.I of the OneMan Committee that those who have attained or
will be attaining 58 Years of age in the year 2020
will be kept out of the allocation process and their
names in the Allocation Lists will be removed. In
Supplementary Report in paragraph 21, the One-Man
Committee has stated:-
“21. It was also agreed by the Parties
that all retired employees between years
2014 to 2020 in each Power Utility in each
State need not be displaced only for
pensioner benefits payable to them.”
50. The above indicates that both the parties had
agreed before the One-Man Committee that all retired
employees between years 2014 to 2020 in each power
utility in each State need not be displaced. Thus,
the above was agreement between both the parties
before the One-Man Committee and direction No.I only
an extension of the said agreement, i.e., whoever
shall be attaining 58 years of age in 2020 shall be
kept out of allocation process. As per paragraph 21
of the Supplementary Report, those, who retire till
then were already kept out of the allocation and the
73
extension till the end of 2020 cannot be said to be
unreasonable. The allocation process being not yet
finalised and awaiting finalisation for last several
years, those who retire either in Telangana State or
Andhra Pradesh has rightly been decided not to be
displaced only for the purpose of shouldering
pensionary liability. The direction No.I is
equitable.
51. The applicants further submit that after the
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 by letter dated
26.06.2020, Andhra Pradesh power utilities have
struck 119 names from the incoming 655 list from the
Telangana State power utilities to Andhra Pradesh
power utilities. We are of the view that the said
dropping is only consequential to the decision of the
One-Man Committee as reflected in paragraph 21 of
Supplementary Report and direction No.I of Concluding
Report. The Andhra Pradesh power utilities have also
deleted 50 names from the list of 584 employees
outgoing from Andhra Pradesh power utilities to
Telangana State power utilities, which was again in
compliance of the One-Man Committee’s decision. Any
74
consequential action taken in pursuance of the
Concluding Report cannot be said to be not
contemplated by the final Concluding Report or cannot
be said to be an open ended report. The consequence
of Concluding Report has to be taken to its logical
ends. Further, 10 employees have been added by
direction Nos. II and the reasons have been given in
the letter dated 26.06.2020 for relieving them, which
is again consequence of direction Nos.I and II. We,
thus, are of the view that the One-Man Committee has
considered all materials and objections placed before
it by both sides including the representation of the
employees and employees organisations submitted from
time to time. 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. The One-Man
Committee being aware of all objections and having
taken a conscious decision to finalise the allocation
between two States, we do not find any such error in
the process which may warrant any clarification or
direction by this Court. We may further notice that
the exercise undertaken by the One-Man Committee is
75
to allocate 655 from Telangana State to Andhra
Pradesh and same number from Andhra Pradesh to
Telangana State. Apart from the above two
allocations, other personnel, who were working in
Telangana State and Andhra Pradesh were not disturbed
by allocation.
52. Learned counsel for the applicants have also
taken exception to reciprocity of 655 number. We do
not find that there is any 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 has been annexed, which is utility-wise and
personnel-wise, which is clear and unambiguous. We,
thus, do not find any merit in the Miscellaneous
Applications filed by Telangana State power utilities
being M.A. Nos. 1286, 1290, 1292 and 1291, which are
dismissed.
53. We may also need to deal with the submission of
Shri Balasubramanian, learned senior counsel in M.A.
No.1287 of 2020. The main submission of the learned
counsel is that applicant being permanent employee of
76
Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company
with regard to which G.O. No.24 dated 29.05.2014 was
issued, no further allocation was required. It is
submitted that Ananthapur and Kurnool districts were
transferred from Central Power Distribution Company
Ltd. to Southern Power Distribution Company Ltd. He
submits that when allocation was made from Central
Power Distribution Company to Southern Power
Distribution Company Ltd., allocation was complete
and no further allocation was necessary. Paragraph 2
of the Government Order reads as follows:-
“II. Employees: All the employees working
in Kurnool and Ananthapur circles on
the appointed day will continue to
work in the same places till the final
allotment of employees to the
respective DISCOMS is completed in
accordance with guidelines to be
issued by government separately in
this regard. Their salaries will be
paid by APCPDCL and reimbursed by
APSPDCL on monthly basis till the
final allotment is completed.
Provisional allocation of staff will
be done as per State Government
guidelines.”
54. The paragraph 2 above also contemplates final
allotment. Before the High Court, one of the points
77
framed for consideration was to the following
effect:-
“4. Whether the division of employees of
the TSSPDCL need not be undertaken in view
of clause C(8) of the Twelfth Schedule ?”
55. The above points were categorically answered by
the High Court in paragraph 59 of the judgment, which
is to the following effect:-
“59. The two Districts of Anantapur and
Kurnool which were part of APCPDCL before
the creation of the State of Telangana
have been reassigned to the APSPDCL by
clause C(8) of the Twelfth Schedule. The
submission of Sri C.V. Mohan Reddy that in
view of the said provision the need for
division of the employees between the
APSPDCL and the TSPDCL is obviated and the
application of Section 82 of the Act has
got excluded, is without any merit. Under
clause C(8) of the Twelfth Schedule, the
division was confined only to the
territorial areas of the said two
Districts. Neither the assets and
liabilities nor the employees have been
distributed by the said provision.
Evidently, keeping this in mind, the A.P.
State Government, before the appointed
day, has merely divided the cadre strength
between the two DISCOMS by G.O.Ms.No.24,
dated 29-5-2014 while clearly envisaging
therein the final allotment of the
employees in future. It has also allowed
the employees working in the said two
Districts to continue to work in the same
places till the final allotment of the
employees to the respective DISCOMS is
completed. It is therefore imperative that
the allocation between the APSPDCL and the
78
TSPDCL is made in the same way as
allocation of the employees between the
TRANSCOs and GENCOs of the two States is
to be made after determining the
modalities for such allocation.”
56. The above judgment of the High Court having been
upheld by this Court, the submission of learned
counsel that no allocation process ought to be
undertaken for applicants is without any merit.
Further, submission of the learned counsel for the
applicants that their names were not included in the
Final List dated 26.12.2019 also does not in any
manner militate against and their names subsequently
included for allocation from Andhra Pradesh to
Telangana State utilities. We having upheld the
allocation made by the One-Man Committee from Andhra
Pradesh to Telangana State also, we find no merit in
M.A. No.1287 of 2020, which stands rejected.
57. With regard to other M.A.s, which have been
noticed above, we make it clear that 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
79
objection or challenge by any employee or officer is
entertainable, we clarify 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. Insofar as
other claims regarding salary or allowances as raised
in different M.A.s, they need no consideration in
these proceedings and employees of power utilities
are free to adjudicate their claims before
appropriate forum in accordance with law. All other
M.A.s are disposed of accordingly.
58. We having found no merit in the objections to
One-Man Committee’s Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020 it is obligatory for power utilities of
both the States and all concerned to carry out and
implement the directions of the One-Man Committee
Report.
......................J.
( ASHOK BHUSHAN )
......................J.
( M.R. SHAH )
New Delhi,
December 07, 2020.
80
