Reserved on: 05.01.2026 Pronounced on: 28.01.2026 APHC010194572024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 9854/2024 Between: 1. M/S. B.C RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, FLAT NO. 202, CVR RESIDENCY, ANJANEYAPETA, KORITIPADU, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS ORGANIZING SECRETARY. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY BACK WARD CLASSES WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. M/S MAHATMA JYOTHIBA PHULE, ANDHRA PRADESH BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY (MJPAPBCWREIS), 2ND FLOOR, PLOT NO.9, STREET NO.4 BANDI STANLY STREET, UMA SANKAR NAGAR, KANUR, VIJAYAWADA-10, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. CHK SIVA KANTH SUPERINTENDENT, O/O. M/S. MAHATMA JYOTHIBA PHULE ANDHRA PRADESH BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY (MJPAPBCWREIS), ANDHRA PRADESH, KANUR, VIJAYAWADA. 2 4. KUM D SIVA PARVATHI SENIOR ASSISTANT, O/O. M/S. MAHATMA JYOTHIBA PHULE ANDHRA PRADESH BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY (MJPAPBCWREIS), ANDHRA PRADESH, KANUR, VIJAYAWADA. 5. SRI M KRISHNA MOHAN SENIOR ASSISTANT, O/O. M/S. MAHATMA JYOTHIBA PHULE ANDHRA PRADESH BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY (MJPAPBCWREIS), ANDHRA PRADESH, KANUR, VIJAYAWADA. 6. SMT N V N R L GAYATHRI SAI JUNIOR ASSISTANT, O/O. M/S. MAHATMA JYOTHIBA PHULE ANDHRA PRADESH BACKWARD CLASSES WELFARE RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SOCIETY (MJPAPBCWREIS), ANDHRA PRADESH, KANUR, VIJAYAWADA. ...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 any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in providing promotions to the Respondents Nos.3 to 6 though they are taken to the Head Office under redeployment, in contraventions to the District and Zonal seniority list is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the Respondent No. 2 not to give promotions to the redeployed staff working Head office of the 2nd respondent and set aside the promotions which already granted to the Respondents No. 3 to 6 and to pass such other orders. 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 direct the 2nd respondent not to give further promotions to the Respondents No. 3 to 6 in Head office of 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition. 3 IA NO: 2 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 may be pleased to vacate the interim order Dt. 26-04-2024 passed in W.P.No.9854 of 2024 and dismiss the writ petition and pass such other orders. IA NO: 3 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 may be pleased to vacate the interim order dt.26-04-2024 passed in WP.No.9854 of 2024 and dismiss the writ petition and pass such other orders. IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 vacate interim order Dt: 26.04.2024 passed in W.P.No.9854 of 2024 and dismiss the writ petition and pass such other orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V V SATISH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. RAVI KUMAR PONAKAMPALLI 2. GP FOR SERVICES II 3. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE 4. MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI The Court made the following: 4 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.9854 of 2024 ORDER: 1. The present Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of Respondent No.2 in promoting Respondent Nos.3 to 6 though they are taken to the Head Office under redeployment contrary to the District and Zonal Seniority List, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The brief facts are as follows; The Petitioner is a Society registered under the Andhra Pradesh Societies Registration Act bearing Registration No.356/2020. The Petitioner-Society is formed with the teaching staff such as Junior Lecturers, Principals of Junior Colleges and Schools, Post-Graduate Teachers, Trained Graduate Teachers or Craft Teachers working under Respondent No.2-Society across the State and the object of the formation of the Society was said to be to safeguard welfare and interests of its members. 3. It is stated that Respondent No.2-Society was created after separation from the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Residential Educational Institution Society. Respondent No.2-Society consists of 110 BC Residential Institutions across the State and for the purpose of administration they were divided into four (4) Zones. 5 4. While so, the Service Regulations were framed as per by-laws of Respondent No.2-Society and the same are applicable to various classes and category of employees employed under Respondent No.2-Society. As no posts were sanctioned for the Head Office of the Petitioner-Society, the State Government accepted the proposals of Respondent No.2-Society and sanctioned six (6) posts on regular basis vide G.O.Ms.No.25 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department dated 22.11.2018 and thereafter Respondent No.2-Society addressed a letter on 28.11.2018 seeking permission for redeployment of non-teaching posts to the Head Office and the State Government had given administrative sanction for the redeployment vide G.O.RT.No.29 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department dated 11.01.2019. 5. It is stated that as per the sanction the number of posts redeployed are i) three (3) posts of Superintendents; ii) three (3) posts of Senior Assistants; iii) three (3) posts of Typists; iv) two (2) posts of Record Assistants; and v) three (3) posts of Office Subordinates. Thereafter, the State Government issued G.O.RT.No.96 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department dated 13.06.2022 bringing an amendment to the Service Regulations only in respect of posts sanctioned in the Head Office. 6 6. It is stated that the un-official Respondents used to work as Superintendent, Senior Assistant, Attender and Multi-Purpose Worker respectively in their parent institutions and they were much below the seniors working therein. While so, Respondent No.2-Society had issued Proceedings redeploying them in the Head Office for the posts in terms of G.O.RT.No.29 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department dated 11.01.2019. 7. It is stated that Respondent No.3 was initially redeployed as 8Superintendent9 and he sought to be promoted as 8Assistant Secretary-I9. Respondent No.5 was redeployed in the Head Office as 8Attender9 and after redeployment in the Head Office was promoted as 8Junior Assistant9 on 28.02.2019 and thereafter promoted as 8Senior Assistant9 on 28.05.2021. It is stated that Respondent No.6 was redeployed as 8Multi-Purpose Worker (MPW)9 and was promoted as 8Record Assistant9 on 02.03.2019 and thereafter promoted as 8Junior Assistant9 on 28.05.2021. 8. It is stated that Respondent No.2-Society is treating the un-official Respondents as regular employees granted promotions and the same is continued. The un-official Respondents would be appointed in the posts of 8Assistant Secretaries9 and 8Deputy Secretaries9 depriving the promotions to the members of the Petitioner-Society. Though the 7 Petitioner-Society has given representation, since no action was being taken thereon, the present Writ Petition is filed. 9. In the Counter-Affidavit filed by Respondent No.2-Society it is stated that vide G.O.Ms.No.6 Backward Classes Welfare (B2) Department dated 02.04.2012, 45 BC residential schools were transferred from Education Department to the Administrative control of B.C. Welfare Department by formation of new Society. 10. Thereafter, vide G.O.RT.No.7 Backward Classes Welfare (B2) Department dated 11.04.2012, orders were issued for registration of new Society by name “Mahatma Jyothiba Phule Andhra Pradesh Backward Classes Welfare Residential Educational Institutions Society (MJPAPBCWREIS)= to take over the managements of the 8459 BC residential schools from APREIS, Hyderabad. By passage of time, the BC residential schools have increased to 81099. 11. After bifurcation, the State Government had issued separate Service Regulations vide G.O.RT.No.68 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department dated 10.05.2018. Thereafter, the State Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.25 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department dated 22.11.2018 sanctioning certain posts in the Head Office. Similarly, vide G.O.RT.No.29 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department 8 dated 11.01.2019 certain non-teaching posts were sanctioned on redeployment basis. 12. It is stated that after issuance of G.O.RT.No.29 dated 11.01.2019 notices were issued to all the institutions on 24.01.2019 calling for options/willingness from the individuals working in the field units on that date. However, only nine (9) members expressed their willingness as against redeployed posts of fourteen (14). Again options were called for on 23.02.2023 and even on the second occasion, only two (2) members expressed their willingness. However, no decision was taken thereon. 13. It is stated that the individuals, who opted to work in the Head Office on redeployment basis, had foregone their seniority in their respective Districts and cannot claim any right in the said Seniority List. In the course of time, the individuals working in Districts/Zones were promoted and the individuals, who opted to work in the Head Office were promoted as per their seniority in terms of Service Regulations. 14. It is stated that there is absolutely no conflict in the interest of the members of the Petitioner-Society and the un-official Respondents. It is further stated that as per G.O.Ms.No.114 Education (SE-Training) Department dated 28.10.2016 the posts of Deputy Secretary, Assistant Secretary and Accounts Officer are defined under non-teaching category. 9 15. In order to provide equal opportunity to the teaching staff of the Society the promotional avenues were provided on turn basis in the cadre of 8Deputy Secretary-II’ in addition to the earmarking of 8Deputy Secretary-I9 post to the teaching staff exclusively and therefore the Petitioners do not have any locus to challenge G.O.RT.No.96 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department dated 13.06.2022. It is further stated that the employees who opted to work in the Head Office are regular employees in the Head Office and that they are entitled for promotion as per their seniority and Rules. 16. The Counter-Affidavit on similar lines was filed by Respondent Nos.3 to 6. 17. Contentions: The learned counsel for the Petitioner Sri V.V. Satish would submit that the regular promotions to the redeployed staff virtually amounts to bypassing the seniority and those who were juniors in the Districts/Zones were being promoted to higher posts. It is contended that the Head Office is only for the purpose of administration and further the promotions to the individuals working in the Head Office to the higher posts can be only on the basis of their seniority in the Districts/Zones. The learned counsel further submits that they do not have any grievance as regards the G.O.RT.No.29 dated 11.01.2019. 10 18. The learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent No.2-Society Sri Nooka Jagannadham who primarily objected to the Writ Petition being filed contended that an association/society cannot maintain Writ Petition questioning the promotions in the absence of any individual grievance of any of the persons. 19. The learned Standing Counsel contended that once the employees are appointed in the Head Office, their seniority has to be counted from the day they were born. In the Head Office they had foregone seniority in the Districts/Zones and their further promotions would be governed as per the seniority and Rules vis-à-vis limited posts available in the Head Office only. It is further contended that the Petitioner-Society is vis-à-vis the teaching faculty are questioning the appointments in non-teaching posts and the same is inexplicable. 20. Heard the respective counsels. 21. Reasoning: The Petitioner-Society though registered under the Societies Registration Act cannot independently question the promotions of the un-official Respondents unless an aggrieved person is made party to the case. In the absence of any aggrieved person, the associations being a stranger to the promotions cannot maintain the Writ Petition independent thereof in a case of this nature. 11 22. The Supreme Court in Jasbhai Motibhai Desai v. Roshan Kumar, Haji Bashi Ahmed & Ors1 elaborately examined as to whom can be termed to be aggrieved person to have locus standi to maintain the Writ Petition. The relevant portions of the Judgment at Page 684 are extracted below; 37. It will be seen that in the context of locus standi to apply for a writ of certiorari, an applicant may ordinarily fall in any of these categories: (i) <person aggrieved=; (ii) <stranger=; (iii) busybody or meddlesome interloper. Persons in the last category are easily distinguishable from those coming under the first two categories. Such persons interfere in things which do not concern them. They masquerade as crusaders for justice. They pretend to act in the name of pro bono publico, though they have no interest of the public or even of their own to protect. They indulge in the pastime of meddling with the judicial process either by force of habit or from improper motives. Often, they are actuated by a desire to win notoriety or cheap popularity; while the ulterior intent of some applicants in this category, may be no more than spoking the wheels of administration. The High Court should do well to reject the applications of such busybodies at the threshold. 38. The distinction between the first and second categories of applicants, though real, is not always well-demarcated. The first category has, as it were, two concentric zones; a solid central zone of certainty, and a grey outer circle of lessening certainty in a sliding centrifugal scale, with an outermost nebulous fringe of uncertainty. Applicants falling within the central zone are those whose legal rights have been infringed. Such applicants undoubtedly stand in the category of <persons aggrieved=. In the grey outer circle the bounds which separate the first category from the second, intermix, interfuse and overlap increasingly in a centrifugal direction. All persons in this outer zone may not be <persons aggrieved=. 39. To distinguish such applicants from <strangers=, among them, some broad tests may be deduced from the conspectus made above. These tests are not absolute and ultimate. Their efficacy varies according to the circumstances of the case, including the statutory context in which 1 (1976) 1 SCC 671 12 the matter falls to be considered. These are: Whether the applicant is a person whose legal right has been infringed? Has he suffered a legal wrong or injury, in the sense, that his interest, recognised by law, has been prejudicially and directly affected by the act or omission of the authority, complained of? Is he a person who has suffered a legal grievance, a person <against whom a decision has been pronounced which has wrongfully deprived him of something or wrongfully refused him something, or wrongfully affected his title to something?= Has he a special and substantial grievance of his own beyond some grievance or inconvenience suffered by him in common with the rest of the public? Was he entitled to object and be heard by the authority before it took the impugned action? If so, was he prejudicially affected in the exercise of that right by the act of usurpation of jurisdiction on the part of the authority? Is the statute, in the context of which the scope of the words <person aggrieved= is being considered, a social welfare measure designed to lay down ethical or professional standards of conduct for the community? Or is it a statute dealing with private rights of particular individuals? 50. While a Procrustean approach should be avoided, as a rule, the Court should not interfere at the instance of a <stranger= unless there are exceptional circumstances involving a grave miscarriage of justice having an adverse impact on public interests= 23. Similarly the Supreme Court in Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan v. State of Maharashtra2 held that the deprivation of legal right for a person should be actual and not an imaginary one to maintain a Writ Petition as person aggrieved. The Paragraph 10 is extracted below; 10. A <legal right=, means an entitlement arising out of legal rules. Thus, it may be defined as an advantage, or a benefit conferred upon a person by the rule of law. The expression, <person aggrieved= does not include a person who suffers from a psychological or an imaginary injury; a person aggrieved must, 2 (2013) 4 SCC 465 13 therefore, necessarily be one whose right or interest has been adversely affected or jeopardised. (Vide Shanti Kumar R. Canji v. Home Insurance Co. of New York (9) and State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (10).) 24. In service jurisprudence, however, it is only for the aggrieved person to assail the legality of the offending action like promotion, seniority list, transfer, pay, etc., A third party has no locus standi to canvass the legality or correctness of the action, except in cases filed for quo warranto. (See R.K. Jain v. Union of India and B. Srinivasa Reddy v. Karnataka Urban Water Supply & Drainage Board Employees Association & Ors.). 25. A Division Bench of Uttarakhand High Court (authored by then Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) in W.P.No.445 of 2016 dated 08.01.2020 between Union of India Vs Association of Class I (Group A) and Others considered the gamut of notable case law of Hon9ble Supreme Court covering the issue of locus standi/person aggrieved and held that to invoke the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, infringement of legal right followed by legal injury are required to be established. In the said case appointment of Army Officers in the Survey of India was questioned by the association and the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal was set-aside on the ground of lack of locus. 14 26. In the light of the above, the Petitioner cannot be said to have locus to challenge the promotions of the Respondents. 27. Secondly, after bifurcation of the Society, the Service Regulations were framed vide G.O.Ms.No.68 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department dated 10.05.2018. Rule 5 thereof specified the Unit of Appointment. Note (1) thereto states that the Head Office of the MJPABCWREI Society is a separate unit for the purpose of appointment, seniority, discharge and promotion. <Note:- 1) The Head Office of the MJPAPBCWREI Society is a separate unit for the purpose of appointment, seniority, discharge and promotion.= 28. In the light of the specific Rule, it is not open to the Petitioner- Society to contend that the un-official Respondents cannot be treated as regular employees of the Head Office for effecting promotions. The moment the un-official Respondents choose to work in the Head Office, the unit of appointment has changed and their further promotions will be dependent on the seniority and Rules and the vacancies available in the Head Office as was done in this case. 29. The Service Regulations were amended vide G.O.Rt.No.96 Backward Classes Welfare (B) Department dated 13.06.2022. In the said Regulations, in place of Class-I Category-1 of 15 Method of Appointment of Service Regulations, Table-II was incorporated. 30. Thirdly, as per the amended Rule, the Method of Appointment to the posts of Secretary, Deputy Secretary-1, Deputy Secretary-2, Assistant Secretary-1, Assistant Secretary-2 and Accounts Officer were specified. As per the amended Rules, the post of 8Secretary9 is to be filled up on deputation from the Backward Classes Welfare Department of Government of Andhra Pradesh in the cadre of Additional Director/Joint Director, the post of 8Deputy Secretary-19 is to be filled up by promotion from the post of Principal of the Head Office on seniority from the Principals of Junior Colleges under the Society and in case the eligible Principals of Junior Colleges are not available, the post may be filled up on deputation from BC Welfare Department in the cadre of Deputy Director, the post of 8Deputy Secretary-29 is to be filled up by promotion from the post of Principal of Head Office on seniority from the Principals of Junior Colleges and Assistant Secretary (Head Office) on rotation basis. Similarly, the post of 8Assistant Secretary-19 is to be filled up by promotion from the post of Superintendents of Head Office on seniority basis while ‘Assistant Secretary-29 is to be filled up from the cadre of Superintendent (Other than the Head Office) and the post of ‘Accounts Officer9 is to be filled up by promotion from the post of 16 Superintendent working in Head Office on rotation basis. The Table-II is extracted below; Sl.No. Category Post Method of Appointment (1) (2) (3) (4) 1 1 Secretary On deputation from Backward Classes Welfare Department of Government of Andhra Pradesh in the cadre of Additional Director/Joint Director on foreign service terms and conditions. 2 Deputy Secretary-1 i) By promotion from the post of Principal of MJPAPBCWREI Society on Seniority from the Principals of Junior Colleges. ii) In case eligible Principals of Junior Colleges are not available, the post may be filled on deputation from the BC Welfare Department in the cadre of Deputy Director. Deputy Secretary-2 By promotion from the post of Principal of MJPAPBCWREIS on seniority from the Principals of Junior Colleges and Assistant (Head Office) on rotation basis. 3 Assistant Secretary-1 i) By promotion from the Superintendents of MJPAPBCWREI Society (Head Office) on seniority basis. ii) In case eligible Superintendents in MJPAPBCWREI Head Office are not available the post may be filled on deputation from the Backward Classes Welfare Department in the cadre of Assistant Director/District Backward Classes Welfare Officer. Assistant Secretary-2 This post may be filled on promotion from the cadre of Superintendents in MJPAPBCWREI in the State (Other than the Head Office). 4 Accounts Officer By promotion from the post of Superintendent working in MJPAPBCWR Institutions and the Head Office on rotation basis. 17 31. The Rules are explicit and members of non-teaching staff do not occupy the posts that are specified for the teaching faculty. The post of 8Deputy Secretary-II9 is to be filled up only on a rotation basis and in that view, the members of the Petitioner belonging to the teaching faculty cannot be said to be aggrieved by the promotions to the Respondents. 32. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in the Writ Petition and accordingly dismissed. 33. No order as to costs. 34. As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 28.01.2026 IS 18 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION No.9854 of 2024 Date: 28.01.2026 IS