APHC010429222024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 21870/2024 Between: 1. B H CHIRABJEEVI RAJU, S/O. SUBBA RAJU, AGED 58 YEARS, OCC. GSTO, O/O. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST), ARYAPURAM, KAKINADA DIVISION, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. 2. G. VEERABHADRA RAO, S/O SURYA RAO, AGED 49 YEARS, OCC.- GSTO, O/O. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (ST), RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, KAKINADA DIVISION, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. .K. AMMANNA DORA, S/O. ABBIE DORA, AGED 58 YEARS, OCC.- GSTO, O/O. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER (ST), RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, KAKINADA DIVISION, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. K. HARI KRISHNA, S/O. K. SATYANARAYANA, AGED 53 YEARS, OCC.- GSTO, O/O. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST), ALCOT GARDENS, KAKINADA DIVISION, KAKINADA DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (COMMERCIAL TAXES) DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, KUNCHANAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P 2 3. THE NODAL JOINT COMMISSIONER ST, KAKINADA DIVISION, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing Proceedings CCSTs Ref. No. DXZ(2)/55/2023- Kakinada (GSTOs) dated 29- 06-2024 wherein posting the petitioners who were promoted against the clear vacancies of GSTOs relating to Kakinada Nodal Division in the Regional Office, Visakhapatnam on Order to Serve basis is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to Presidential Order, 1975, contrary to G.O. Ms. No. 581 Revenue (SFF) Department dated 24-05-1976 and also violative of Article 14 and 16 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents to post and continue the petitioners in Kakinada Nodal Division and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of COSTS Ref.No.DXZ (2)/55/2023- Kakinada (GSTOs) dated 29-06- 2024 of the 2nd respondent by directing the respondents to post and continue the petitioners in Kakinada Nodal Division, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KAVITHA GOTTIPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.21870 of 2024 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed questioning the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing proceedings vide CCSTs Ref.No.DXZ(2)/55/2023-KKD dated 29.06.2024, whereunder provisional allotment of the petitioners from Nodal Division, Kakinada to Regional Office, Visakhapatnam and posting them on an “Order to Serve” basis, as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the Presidential Order, 1975. 2. The petitioner Nos.1 and 4 were initially appointed as Record Assistants, subsequently promoted as Junior Assistants, and further promoted as Senior Assistants. The 2nd petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Assistant and Promoted as Senior Assistant. The 3rd petitioner was initially appointed as Attender, subsequently promoted as Junior Assistant and further promoted as Senior Assistant. Subsequently, all the petitioners were promoted as GSTOs vide proceedings dated 26.06.2024. While so, restructuring proposals were initiated by the 2nd respondent and on the basis of the said proposals, the petitioners were issued impugned orders on “Order to Serve” basis, directing them to work in the Regional Office, Visakhapatnam, though they belong to the Nodal Division, Kakinada. Hence, the present writ petition is filed contending that the said action is in contravention of the Presidential Order, 1975. 4 3. In the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, it is stated that on account of restructuring of the staff pattern throughout the State, it became inevitable to transfer employees of certain Divisions/Zones, where the working strength is higher than the actual cadre strength, to other Divisions/Zones where the working strength is less than the actual cadre strength and suitable persons are not available to fill the gap. Therefore, the employees were transferred and posted out of their local cadre under Para 5(2)(c) of the Presidential Order, in public interest and due to administrative exigency. It is further stated 399 employees of the Department were posted in other local cadres on an “Order to Serve” basis. It is also stated that such employees would be repatriated to their local cadres subject to availability of vacancies. It is further stated that out of the 399 employees so posted, 112 employees have already been repatriated to their parent divisions, and the remaining employees will be repatriated as and when regular vacancies arise in their respective local divisions. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, submits that there are vacancies available in Nodal Division, Kakinada, and submit that it would suffice if the cases of the petitioners are considered for posting at the said place. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services submits that the cases of the petitioners would be considered subject to availability of vacancies and in accordance with the order of priority of repatriation. 5 6. Considering the submissions and without going into the legality of the impugned order, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: i) The cases of the petitioners shall be considered for repatriation to Nodal Division, Kakinada, against regular vacancies available therein, as per the order of priority of repatriation maintained by the respondents’ Department as expeditiously as possible. ii) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Date: 16.12.2025 SNI 6 99 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.21870 of 2024 Dated: 16.12.2025 SNI