06 September 2024 Civil Appeals >> Civil & Consumer Law   |   Employee Related >> Corporate Law  

The bifurcation of the State of Andhra Pradesh into two separate states—Telangana and residual Andhra Pradesh—occurred on June 2, 2014, under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014. This legislative change also led to the reformation of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) into the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) and APSRTC. The transition period brought forth a series of legal disputes concerning the allocation of employees between the two corporations, particularly those appointed in Class III and Class IV categories.

The Employees in Question:

The employees involved in this case were primarily conductors, drivers, and shramiks, appointed between 2014 and 2017 in districts that are now part of Telangana. Following the bifurcation, these employees were temporarily deputed to zones within the residual Andhra Pradesh, pending the finalization of guidelines for permanent allocation. The crux of the legal battle revolved around the validity of repatriation orders issued by APSRTC, directing these employees back to their original zones under TSRTC.

Judicial Proceedings:

In a significant ruling on November 10, 2017, a single judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court set aside the repatriation orders, emphasizing that the guidelines for employee allocation between the two corporations had not been finalized. The appellant, APSRTC, subsequently filed writ appeals. In an interim order dated April 18, 2018, the High Court temporarily suspended the earlier ruling, directing employees to report to their parent zones under TSRTC based on newly established guidelines.

High Court's Final Ruling:

The matter escalated to a division bench, which, in a subsequent ruling dated November 21, 2019, took a different stance. The High Court ordered the permanent allocation of these employees to their posts within the residual Andhra Pradesh, drawing an analogy to provisions in Section 77 of the Reorganisation Act. This decision was met with criticism, particularly regarding its interpretation of statutory provisions applicable to state government employees versus those concerning public sector undertakings. 

Legal Analysis of Relevant Provisions:

Key sections of the Reorganisation Act come into play here. Section 77 pertains primarily to state government employees, outlining provisions for their provisional and final allocation to the successor states. Conversely, Section 82 specifically addresses employees of public sector undertakings and mandates that these corporations determine the modalities for distributing personnel between the newly formed states.

The APSRTC Board had already established an Agenda Note on August 24, 2017, which outlined that Class III and IV employees would be allocated based on their regional recruitment, indicating that these employees belonged to the respective corporations where their regions fell post-bifurcation.

Conclusion:

The division bench's reliance on Section 77 was deemed misplaced, as it overlooked the specific applicability of Section 82 and the established guidelines within the Agenda Note. The ruling failed to consider that the employees were not absorbed into their deputational posts, retaining their seniority in their original zones. Ultimately, the appeals filed by APSRTC were upheld, and the High Court's order was set aside, reinforcing the principle that the allocation of employees from public sector undertakings must adhere to the modalities defined by their respective governing bodies. This case serves as a crucial reminder of the complexities involved in administrative reorganizations and the necessity for clear legislative frameworks to guide the transition of personnel in public service sectors.

  ANDHRA PRADESH REORGANISATION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2015