ONE MAN COMMISSION-SIX POINT FORMULA-ANDHRA PRADESH-HEADED BY Mr. J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.) Vol III

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
ONE MAN COMMISSION

(SIX POINT FORMULA)
J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.)
FINAL REPORT
(IN THREE VOLUMES)
VOLUME-III
CONTAINING PART-2 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON

IMPLEMENTATION OF PRESIDENTIAL ORDER
ON PUBLIC SERVICES, 1975
(01-10-2003 to 30-09-2004)
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SPF) DEPARTMENT
SEPTEMBER, 2004
One Man Commission (SPF) 2 Final Report
PREFACE TO FINAL REPORT PART – 2

(VOLUME – III)
Final Report PART-2 on Implementation of the Presidential Order in

Volume-III is in continuation of Part-1, which is up to 30-09-2003. As
may be seen from the Main Preface in Volume-I, the term of the
Commission was extended from 01-10-2003 to 31-03-2004 in
G.O.Rt.No.4762, G.A.(S.P.F-A) Department, dated 09-10-2003 (Appendix
XIII) and from 01-04-2004 to 30-09-2004 in G.O.Rt.No.1644, G.A.(S.P.F-
A) Department, dated 07-04-2004 (Appendix XIV). Part-2 covers the
extended period from 01-10-2003 up to 30-09-2004.
In this Part of the Report the Commission has brought out 24 fresh
Findings of deviations under the existing Deviation Genres of Part- 1. I
have also included 34 Proceedings on the cases disposed during the
period of this Part and also added Appendices pertaining to this Part of
the Report. The Proceedings and Appendices in this Part are added to
Volume-III itself. The numbering of the Appendices and Proceedings of
this Part is in continuation of those of Part-1 in Volume-II. There are no
Annexures pertaining to this Part.
The Deviation Genres in this Part are the same as appear in Part-1
and the further Findings in this part are placed under the relevant original
Genres. The Findings are given the same serial number under the same
Genre, as in Part -1 adding an alphabet A/B/C/ to the Findings of this part.
The Remedial Action under each Finding in this Part is also similarly
given the same number under the same Genre adding the alphabet A/B/C/
to it. In this way the continuity of the Findings and the Remedial Actions
is ensured from Part-1 to Part-2.
I have not chapterised this Part but kept all the Findings under the
concerned Deviation Genre numbers of Part-1. Notionally this Part is
Chapter 16, after the last Chapter 15 in Part-1. Hence paragraphs in this
Part have been numbered giving 16 as the first number with decimal
points.
Immediately after the first extension of the Commission from 01-10-

2003, the Chief Secretary Sri Mohan Kanda, IAS had kindly written to all
the Special Chief Secretaries, Principal Secretaries and Secretaries to
Government to ensure that the Heads of Departments under them give the
information expeditiously to this Commission. His letter may be seen at
Appendix - XV in this Volume. The response of the Departments is
rather deplorable, consistently despite the meetings with the Head of
Department representatives. The second round of meetings was held from
July 2004. Total 62 meetings were held. The result is not so encouraging
as departments seem to have problem with retaining or collecting
information. The Commission hopes implementation of the report will not
run into the same problem.
I am again grateful to the Government for reposing confidence in

me. I hope they will find the report exhaustive and useful for a better
implementation of the Presidential Order.
Hyderabad J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.)

Dated: ONE MAN COMMISSION (S.P.F.)
Volume-III
FINAL REPORT
PART - 2
CONTENTS
Subject Page Nos.
Preface to Final Report Part – 2 2–3
Chapter-16:
Findings (In continuation of Part-1) 5 - 33
Appendices related to Part-2 37-99
Proceedings related to Part-2 103-169

CHAPTER – 16
FINAL REPORT PART- 2 ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
PRESIDENTIAL ORDER,
FROM 01-10-2003 TO 10-05-2004
16.1.0 In Part-1 of this Report which appears in Volume - I there are 15

Chapters, I therefore thought that Part-2 Which is only a single Chapter
can appropriately constitute Chapter 16 of the total Report on
Implementation of the Presidential Order.
16.1.1 In the Preface I have explained why the Second Part of the Report is
being closed as of 10 May 2004 instead of doing so at the end of the
term of the Commission on 30-09-2004 . The reason may be reiterated
viz. that after 10-05-2004 a new Government will be formed. There
may be a call by the new Government at short notice for submission of
the Commission‟s Report. Therefore, it is being kept ready at this stage
as an anticipatory measure.
16.1.2 Here below I record my Findings during the period covered by this Part
of the Report:-
HEADS OF DEPARTMENTS (HODs)

Deviation Genre No. I
16.2.0 Finding 23-A Under the above Genre in Final Report SECTION-A,
PART-1, the Commission has shown how offices which should not be
classified as Head of Department offices have been treated as Head of

Department offices thereby putting them outside the purview of the
Presidential Order under Para 14 (b). In this process the posts in such
offices, which should have been subjected to reservation for locals of the
District and Zones in which the offices are located, have been made free
posts depriving the locals of their reservation. Most of these offices are
in Hyderabad City and therefore the adversely affected locals are of
Hyderabad district and Zone VI. ●
16.2.1 The Commission wanted to check up how many locals have been thus
adversely affected, and called for information from the offices of all the
existing Heads of Departments.
16.2.2 Only 52 existing HODs have responded. The results of this response are
given at Appendix No XVI.
16.2.3 This sample shows that in the posts below LDC level 81.1% are locals.
In the posts of LDC level only 41.4% are locals. In the Zonal posts
39.3% are locals. If we are to extrapolate from this sample it would
mean that in all the non-legitimate HODs 39% posts have been
lost to the locals in the LDC level posts, which is the largest category,
and similarly, 30% in the Zonal posts. This is based on the reservation
percentage of 80 and 70 respectively. Normally in the free percentage

of 20 and 30 also some locals could get in.
16.2.4 This Finding is recorded to show that even the simple quantification
which can be done if the HODs co-operate and send the figures of the
staff in the Head Office, we could get an idea of the magnitude of
deprivation suffered by locals under this one single Genre of Deviation.
This particular Genre of Deviation adversely affects only the locals of
Hyderabad District and Zone VI unlike the other Genres under which
the deprivation could be in most of the Districts and almost all the
Zones excepting one or two which might have gained by the deviation.
Remedial Action (III-A)
16.2.5 Government may devise some means by which the HODs will co-operate
in giving information required by the Commission in matters of
Deviations. The best way is to form teams of Officers for a cluster of
Departments, who will go through the records and extract information. ●
REGIONAL OFFICES
Deviation Genre No. IV
16.3.0 Finding No.40-A The provision under Para 5 (2) (b) of the
Presidential Order has been adequately dealt with in GOP No.728,
G.A.(Six Point Formula .A) Department, dt: 01.11.1975 at Para 10
(b). This Para has been incorporated almost verbatim in AP Ministerial
Service Rules as Rule 16-A vide G.O.Ms.No. 803, G.A (Service. B) Dept.,
dt: 29.12.1980. This Rule has been mutilated
out of context and mis-applied for inter-zonal transfers within a
Region. ●
16.3.1 One case has come to the notice of this Commission but it could be the
tip of an iceberg. Please see the Proceeding at Sl.No.99 and the letter
addressed to the Government in the matter at Appendix XVII.
Remedial Action (XIV-A)
16.3.2 Unequivocal instructions may be issued by GAD (Ser.) and SPF that this
Rule in the Ministerial Service Rules does not permit inter-cadre
transfers either between districts for district cadre posts or between
Zones for Zonal Cadre posts even within a Region. The Rule is only to
facilitate transfers between the Regional Office and the subordinate
offices and vice versa, as amplified in Para 10 (b) of the G.O.P. No. 728,
G.A (SPF) Department, dated 01-11-1975. ●
URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES

Deviation Genre No. V
16.4.0 Finding No.44-A In connection with the Finding No.44 in SECTION-A,

PART-1 of the Final Report a reference was made to the Government
which is available at Appendix XVIII. ●
UNIT OF APPOINTMENT/LOCAL CADRE
Deviation Genre No. VI
16.5.0 Finding No.47-A (a) It has come to the notice of this Commission
that in certain cases promotions were given to the Village
Development Officers, Grade-II to the posts of Village Development
Officers, Grade-I on the basis of the respective district seniorities to the
vacancies in the district. It appears from the above that the promotions
have been based on district as a unit, not the Zone as contemplated
under the Presidential Order for all Zonal posts.
16.5.1 Under the Presidential Order dt.18.10.1975 the posts of Village

Development Officers, Grade-I and Grade-II fall under the category of
zonal posts under sub-para (3) of Para-3. The promotion to a zonal post
i.e., to the post of V.D.O, Grade-I has to be confined to the vacancies
within the Zone and on the basis of zonal seniority of the lower post, in
this case of the V.D.O, Grade-II. Hence giving promotions to the post of
V.D.O, Grade-I district-wise on the basis of district seniorities and for
district vacancies is a direct contravention of the Presidential Order.
16.5.2 Perhaps this error has occurred because the A.P. Panchayati Raj
Subordinate Service Rules for the posts of Village Development
Officers (issued in G.O.Ms.No. 979, Panchayat Raj (Estt.VI)
Department, dated 08-11-1979) specify district as the “unit of
appointment”. It may be pointed out that “unit of appointment” is
different from “local area” as contemplated in Para 3 of the
Presidential Order. The seniorities of the V.D.Os, Grade-II may be
maintained district-wise, but when it comes to promotions to the
post of Village Development Officer, Grade-I, these district-wise
seniorities are to be integrated into a Zonal seniority and
promotions given on the basis of such seniority to the vacancies
within the Zone. In many departments “units of appointment” are
discrete parts of a Zone but when promotions are given to zonal
posts it is the zonal vacancies that are taken into account and the
seniorities of the various “units of appointment” are integrated into a
single zonal seniority.
16.5.3 (b) It is also seen from the aforesaid Rules that these were issued on 8-
11-1979 and given effect to from 23.09.1975. The Government had
appointed One Man Commission of Sri Sundaresan, IAS (Retd.) to revise
all the Service Rules to bring them into conformity with the Presidential
Order. Perhaps this would have been done for these rules also, but the
revised Rules were not issued. The Rules as they stand carry a
provision under Rule 4 incorporating the provisions of the Presidential
Order which make these posts Zonal posts with 70% reservation for
locals under the Presidential Order. Notwithstanding the fact that the
rules are of 1979, the position in the Presidential Order as mentioned
herein above would remain unchanged and apply and override anything
to the contrary in the Rules.
16.5.4 (c) It is further seen that under G.O.Ms.No.369, P.R & R.D (Mandal-I)
Department, dt.12.12.2001 creating the posts of Village Secretaries the
position with regard to the Village Development Officers as mentioned
above would remain unchanged. ●
16.5.5 Please see the Proceeding at Sl.No.96 and the letter addressed to the
Government in the matter at Appendix XIX.
Remedial Action (XX-A)
16.5.6 (a) All the promotions given right from the beginning of the
Presidential Order to the present day to the post of VDO Grade-I on
the district-wise basis have to be reviewed and looked into again in the
light of the above mentioned position.
16.5.7 (b) All promotions from the posts of VDOs Grade-II to VDOs Grade-I and
subsequent promotion from those posts would have to be reviewed
accordingly, with necessary consequential action.
16.5.8 (c) It is high time that the Sundaresan Committee Report with regard to
these Rules is implemented and the Rules are revised accordingly. ●
CROSS CADRE MOVEMENT
TRANSFERS
Deviation Genre No. VII
16.6.0 Finding No. 48-A It was found from certain cases of Part-time Junior
Lecturers that their initial appointment was made in certain Zones
without observing the Presidential Order with regard to local area or
reservation of local candidates. Part-time appointment is also in the
nature of a direct appointment even though it is initially considered to
be temporary. ●
16.7.0 Finding No.48-B Subsequent to this initial violation in appointment,

violation of Presidential Order was again done when the regularization of
Part-Time Junior Lecturers was taken up. They were regularized in the
same Zones in which they were working. Since regularization was a
direct appointment in a full time post the Presidential Order on local
areas and local candidates have been violated. This is the second
violation in respect of these posts. ●
16.8.0 Finding No. 48-C The third violation took place when the regularized
Part-Time Junior Lecturers were “transferred” to their “native districts”
and were placed not in the last rank as per the Rules, but were given
the rank with reference to a certain date – date of the issue of the
G.O.Ms.No. 259, Education, dated 12-10-1999 thus disturbing the
seniorities of those who were selected regularly by the Andhra Pradesh
College Service Commission / Andhra Pradesh Public Service
Commission. In fact they should have been appointed originally in their
local zones and if there was a vacancy, and not first appointed in the
Zones where they were non-locals and then transferred and given a
particular date. The whole process is in contravention of the Para 5 of
the Presidential Order and the General Rules. Even in the transfer
orders the word “native” is used and not a “local candidate”. Therefore
one does not know whether they were transferred, where they were
“local candidates” or where they were “natives” but not necessarily
“locals”. ●
16.8.1 Please see the Proceeding at Sl. No.70 and the Commission‟s letter
addressed to the Government at Appendix XX.
Remedial Action (XXI-A)
16.8.2 The case of all Part-Time Junior Lectures regularized or yet to be

regularized, may be reviewed and regularization should take place on
the basis of their local status only in the vacancies in the Zones in which
they are locals. Necessary consequential action may be taken after such
a review. Non-regularized Part-time Junior Lecturers may also be
reshuffled so that only local candidates occupy the posts. ●
16.9.0 Finding No. 51-A Five cases of inter zonal transfers of Town Planning
Officers by the Director of Town Country planning of Andhra Pradesh,
Hyderabad have been effected in his Proceedings R.O.C.No. 1006/M2,
12345, dated 26-08-2003 when there was a ban on transfers. Even
when there is no ban inter zonal transfers require the permission of the
Government through the procedure in which the approval of the Hon‟ble
Chief Minister is necessary through G.A.D. and Finance Department. The
matter was brought to the notice of Secretary, G.A (SPF) Department by
this Commission. He has referred the matter to Secretariat Department
of Municipal Administration and Urban Development, but there has been
no response from them. As matters stand the transfers violate the
Presidential order and the procedures laid down by the Government
under Para 5(2) of the Presidential order. Also they are in violation of
the Government‟s ban on transfers. ●
16.9.1 The Commission‟s D.O. Letter on the matter is at Appendix XXI.
Remedial Action (XXI-B)
16.9.2 After examining whether the Government had not relaxed the ban and
also whether the procedure was violated, the transfers may be reversed
and necessary action taken against the officers responsible. ●
16.10.0 Finding No.51-B A case has come to notice in the department of

Treasuries and Accounts that certain individuals were transferred
from Zones to the Head of Department‟s office when the rules have
no provision for such transfers. A provision for a transfer is there
for filling one out of four vacancies by rotation but these transfers were
not under that provision as there was a nil panel that year. If there had
been a provision for such transfers in the Service Rules, they would
have come under Para 5 (2)(a). Since they do not come under that it is
a clear violation of the Presidential Order. This is another example of
taking advantage of the exclusions under Para 14(b), as Head of
Department office is excluded from the Presidential Order. This has
given advantage to the transferred persons as an obvious case of
favouritism for accelerated promotion in the HOD office thereby
adversely affecting the legitimate seniority and opportunity for
promotion of those in the Head of Department office cadre. This case
indicates that this type of deviation may be taking place in other
departments also. ●
10.10.1 Please see the Proceeding at Sl.No.97 and the Commission‟s letter
addressed to the Government at Appendix XXII.
Remedial Action (XXI–C)

10.10.2 (1) The persons who have been illegally benefited by the transfers
should be repatriated to their respective Zones and fixed in the Zonal
seniority retrospectively and their promotions reviewed accordingly.
16.10.3 (2) The seniorities of the persons in the HOD office may be refixed
thereafter giving them consequential benefits.
16.10.4 (3) Clear instructions may be issued in this regard to all the
departments not to transfer people from the Zones to the Head of
Department or any other excluded organisation under Presidential Order
and vice versa unless there is a clear provision in the rules permitting
such transfers for very sound reasons. This will be in conformity with Para
5 (2)(a) of the Presidential Order. ●
Deputations And Fair Share Principle
Deviation Genre No. VIII
16.11.0 In addition to what is given in the SECTION-A, PART-1 of Final Report, it

has been further found that certain categories of staff which are not
sanctioned for Head Office which exist only in the Sub-ordinate office in
the Zones, are utilized in the Heads of Department offices. In effect it is
a transfer of posts from Zonal posts to the Head of Department Office,
thereby taking them away from the purview of the Presidential Order
and bringing them under the exclusions of Para 14(b) of the Presidential
Order, depriving the local candidates in the Zones of their right of
reservation in direct recruitment as well as the advantage of promotions
to the posts within the Zone under Zonal seniority. The two specific
cases are given in the Findings below.
16.12.0 Finding No.68-A In the Department of Information and Public

Relations, six posts of Divisional Public Relations Officers are being
utilized in the Head Office, when there is no sanction for such posts in
the Head Office. These are taken in an arbitrary manner and these are
termed as being “on tenure basis”. There cannot be anyone on tenure
basis when there is no sanctioned post. Thus this is a diversion of six
posts from the Zones to the Head of Department Office without any
legal basis or authority. It is violative of the Presidential Order as it
deprives the Zones and their local candidates of these posts. ●
Similarly the following posts were sanctioned, but actually the

posts utilized are shown in column 4 and the excess posts are
shown in column 5. The posts in column 5 are all Zonal posts
diverted to Head of Department Office depriving the local candidates of
these posts in the Zones and thereby violating the Presidential Order
apart from violating all the Service Rules and Fundamental Rules and
Financial Code etc.
S.No. Name of the Sanctioned Posts Excess

Post Posts being Posts
utilized
1 DPROs 2 5 3
2 Dy.E.I.Es 1 2 1
3 A.E.I.Es 3 3 -
4 Divl.PROs. Nil 6 6
5 A.P.R.Os. 10 9 -
6 A.I.Es. 6 5 -
7 Inf.Technicians 1 1 -
8 Cine-Operators 3 3 -
This matter has already been reported to the Government in G.A.(SPF)

Department with a copy to the concerned Secretary to Government vide
Appendix XXIII.
16.13.0 Finding No. 68-B In the Cooperative Department there are no

posts of CSRs created in the office of the Commissioner and
Registrar of Cooperative Societies (HOD). But they have been using
the post of CSRs in the Head Office. The number varies from time
to time. Obviously this is an arbitrary choice of individuals who
wish to come to the Head Office. The number is kept flexible. As
there is no CSR post sanctioned for the Head of Department Office,
there cannot be deputation on tenure basis from the Zones. It is in
effect transferring all these posts from the Zones to the Head of
Department Office which is violative of the Presidential Order and it
deprives the locals of their rights in these posts. In addition, of
course, it is also violative of the Service Rules, Fundamental Rules

and Financial Code. ●
The matter has already been referred to the Secretary to Government,

G.A. (SPF) Department with a copy to the Principal Secretary to
Government, Agriculture and Cooperation Department vide Appendix
XXIV
Remedial Action (XXII-A)
16.13.1 If the Department needs the post in Head of Department office they
should get them sanctioned for the Head office separately and not divert
them from the Zones. In the process the posts at the zonal or district
level should not be abolished or suppressed for this purpose. ●
ON OTHER DUTY (OD)
Deviation Genre No. IX
16.14.0 Finding No. 73-A G.O.Ms.No. 572, Education Department dated 24-
05-1976, Government has ordered that five posts of Lecturers in the
Collegiate Cell of the SCERT, need not be taken into account for
computing the effective cadre strength of the local cadres but should be
treated as “floating posts” and be filled by rotation from different local
cadres equitably. This order is in deviation of the Presidential Order on
the following grounds.
16.14.1 (1) Neither the general service rules nor the F.R.s have any
concept like floating posts which have been described in the G.Os
as post to which the persons in that category of posts can be appointed

by rotation, equitably.
16.14.2 (2) This Institution is found to be in the G.S.R. 527,as a “State Level
Office” at Sl.No.30A. Obviously this position is subsequent to the
aforesaid G.O., which is of 1976. Even at that time this floating posts
concept violated G.O.P.728, G.A.(SPF-A) Department, dated 01.11.75.
After the inclusion of the organization in G.S.R.527 there was all the
more reason for the deputations in the organisation to be brought under
G.O.P.728 Para 9 (B) and 11. The “floating posts” order deleted by the
Government. But this did not happen and the violation of the
Presidential Order continues from the date of this G.O. and is further
aggravated after inclusion of the Institute under G.S.R. 527.
16.14.3 (3) What makes this Finding poignant is that one single person has been
continuing in a “floating post” for the last six years and she is alleged to
be the wife of an important officer of the Department of School
Education. Even a normal deputation is for three yeas. Neither the
principle of equitable fair share of Para 9 B and 11 of G.O.P. 728 nor
even the rotation and equitable principle of the G.O. of “Floating posts”
has been respected in the case of this favoured lady. ●
16.14.4 The Commission‟s letter to the Government in this regard is at

Appendix XXV.
Remedial Action (XXIII-A)
16.14.5 The existing deputationists who have completed three years may
be replaced and deputationists may be taken on equitable basis
under Para 9(B) and 11 of G.O.P.728, dated 01.11.75 from other Zones
particularly those Zones which have not got the opportunity so far. ●
16.15.0 Finding No.73 – B In our Finding No.73 in SECTION-A, PART-1 of

the Final Report, we have shown how the device of “other duty” has
been misused to bring persons from various Zones to Hyderabad City or
other places of their choice, circumventing the need for a transfer under
Para 5 (2) of the Presidential Order. ●
16.15.1 In this connection we have also cited one case in Proceedings at Sl.
No.58 of Volume II.
16.15.2 Further correspondence in this case brought forth a letter from the
Secretariat Department of Irrigation and Command Areas that the
person wrongfully brought and kept on deputation cannot be
repatriated because 14 persons in that same Division IV of Special
Designs Circle (in the city) were working “on other duty” and would
have to be repatriated. This Division IV of Special Designs Circle is
located in the city and is therefore misused for bringing persons
from other Zones who want to come to the city. There is no other
reason for having 14 persons out of the working strength of 16
non-engineers, which includes mostly ministerial staff and
Draughtsmen, to be on other duty. This is a violation of the
Presidential Order apart from being violation of the normal staffing
practices. The deplorable part of it is that it is from the Secretariat
Department that the letter has come in this regard saying that the
people on other duty cannot be repatriated because almost the
entire division will remain unmanned. The proper course of
manning the Division would have been direct recruitment and

promotions under the Service Rules, the normal procedures adopted for
filling sanctioned posts.
Remedial Action (XXIII-B)
16.15.3 All the persons on other duty should be immediately sent back and the
post filled by direct recruitment/promotions as the case may be. The
local candidates of Hyderabad District and Zone VI have been deprived
of these posts for as long as the persons from other Zones on other duty
have been there. This should not be permitted to continue any longer
and strict instructions should be issued to prevent such malpractices,
which affect the interest of local candidates and violate the Presidential
Order through this pernicious device of “other duty”.
16.15.4 Perhaps the Govt may also consider taking action against those who are
responsible unless it has been permitted at the Government level itself.
In the latter case, the Secretariat Department may specifically record
Government‟s decision against this pernicious device and communicate
it to all the departments and particularly to all the officers of the
Irrigation and Command Area Department. ●
16.15.5 The Commission‟s letter addressed to Government in this regard is at

Appendix XXVI.
WORK CHARGED ESTABLISHMENT
Deviation Genre No. X
16.16.0 Finding No. 86-A The work-charged employees have not only been
appointed in disregard of the Presidential Order and continue to be
treated as out-side the Presidential Order, but are being transferred
from anywhere to anywhere, regardless of their local status. This results
in the seniorities of the other work-charged employees being adversely
affected apart from the violation of the Presidential order already
inherent in the system, being further compounded. ●
16.16.1 A specific case on this issue that has come to light shows that three
workcharged Work Inspectors of Zone II, one of Zone V and one of
Zone III have been transferred to Zone VI. Please see the Proceeding at
Sl.No.98 and the Commission‟s letter written to the Government at
Appendix XXVII.
Remedial Action (XXIV-A)
16.16.2 (a) Until the workcharged employees are brought under the
Presidential Order and posted in the Zones in which they are locals, no
transfers should be affected.
16.16.3 (b) In the specific case above, those transferred should be sent back to
their original positions or to their respective local zones if there are
vacancies there. ●
GAZETTING OF POSTS AND SPECIFIED GAZETTED

CATEGORY
Deviation Genre No. XI
16.17.0 Finding No. 97-A The post of Horticulture Officer is originally the
post of the Assistant Agriculture Officer redesignated as Agriculture
Officer, which is now called as Horticulture Officer in Horticulture
Department on bifurcation of Agriculture Department. The post of
Assistant Agricultural Officer is included in Specified Gazetted Category
(Third Schedule of the Presidential Order at Sl.No.3-A) and the post
has also been categorized along with the posts of Tahsildar, Assistant
Executive Engineer, Inspector of Police and Motor Vehicle Inspector for
60% reservation under Para 8 (3) of the Presidential Order. Hence the
post of Horticulture Officer should also be similarly brought into the
Third Schedule and also under the 60% reservation along with the
posts specified in Para 8 (3) of the Presidential Order,
retrospectively with effect from the date of its designation as Assistant
Horticulture Officer, otherwise its description in the Service Rules as a
Zonal post would be legally in contravention of the Presidential Order,
and mutation of its character as Zonal post with 60% reservation
merely by change of designation would be violative of the basic
principle of immutability of the Presidential Order. ●
Remedial Action (XXV-A)
16.17.1 (a) Obtaining the orders of Government of India for the inclusion of the
post of Horticulture Officer in Specified Gazetted Category (Third
Schedule) with retrospective effect.
16.17.2 (b) Obtaining orders of Government of India for extending 60%

reservation to the post of Horticulture Officer under Para 8(3) of the
Presidential Order with retrospective effect to validate what the
Department is already following.
16.17.3 (c) To continue the post of Assistant Director of Horticulture as a State

cadre post since the Six Point Formula contemplates, in any
Department, one Gazetted post to be under the Third Schedule. Since in
Horticulture Department the post of Horticulture Officer, the first
Gazetted post, is being proposed for inclusion in the Third Schedule, the
next Gazetted post can remain a State-wide post.
16.17.4 (d) Consequential review of all appointments and promotions may be

done in the light of action at (a) to (c) above. ●
16.17.5 The Commission‟s letter to the Government in this regard is at

Appendix XXVIII.
16.18.0 Finding No. 97-B Some posts that were non-gazetted on 18-
10-75 and were gazetted thereafter, continue to be treated as Zonal
posts and also with reservation of 70% in direct recruitment. In Principle
this is in conformity with the Commission‟s basic view regarding
immutability of the original character of a post after passing of the
Presidential Order. But this principle has to be given effect only through
proper legal action under the presidential Order. Where it is done
without the legal course of action, however desirable, the action has
been all along illegal. After gazetting, the post becomes a State level
post under the Presidential Order and loses its reservation.
16.18.1 Secondly, after gazetting, the post should cease to be under Sub-
ordinate Service Rules and there should be either adhoc or regular
Service Rules for the post. ●
16.18.2 This has come to notice through the case of Industrial Promotion Officer
of the Department of Industries and Commerce which was gazetted with
effect from 21.01.98 but continues in the Andhra Pradesh Industries
Sub-ordinate Service Rules. It also continues to be treated as a Zonal
post with 70% reservation for direct recruitment.
16.18.3 It is likely that more cases of this type exist. With some variation two
other cases have come to light already and are included under Finding
No. 124 in SECTION–A, PART-1 of the Report (Volume-I) and Finding
No. 97-A above.
Remedial Action (XXV-B)
16.18.4 Therefore the proper course of action has to be laid down when the
posts are gazetted. We have already given some extensive suggestions
in our Remedial Action (XXV) in SECTION-A, PART-1 of the Final
Report. However we would like to suggest the following course of action
to legally operationalise the suggestion made therein:
16.18.5 Add the following as sub-para (9) under Para 8 of the Presidential
Order :-
“Reservation in favour of local candidates in the matter of direct

recruitment in terms of Para 8 Sub-para 2 and their local area
(Zone/multi Zone, as the case may be) shall remain unchanged even
after any of the Non-gazetted posts is made gazetted. This
provision shall be valid with effect from 18.10.1975 i.e. the date of
promulgation of the Presidential Order.”
16.18.6 In Sub-para (j) of Para 2(1) of the Presidential Order after the words
„Central Government‟ the following provision shall be added:
“Provided that all the posts that have been gazetted after 18.10.75 from
among the non-gazetted posts, shall be deemed to be included under
the Third Schedule of the Presidential Order with effect from the date of
gazetting”.
16.18.7 All the posts Gazetted after 18-10-75 should be removed from the Sub-
ordinate Service Rules and separate Service Rules for each such post
should be made. ●
16.18.8 The letter addressed to Government by this Commission in this regard is

at Appendix XXIX.
COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENTS
Deviation Genre No. XII
16.19.0 Finding No.102-A G.O.Ms.No. 214, General Administration

(Ser.A) Department, dated 09.06.199F8 and the seven G.Os cited
therein govern the Compassionate Appointments of
Son/Daughter/Spouse of the Government employee who retires on
medical invalidation. These Compassionate Appointments can be
done from the same department from which the invalidated
employee retires, as per the G.Os. The Government orders do not
stipulate that the appointment should be done according to the
local status of the beneficiary: son/daughter/spouse. Since
Compassionate Appointment is also direct recruitment, Presidential
Order should apply. This has not been done in the Government orders
cited above. ●
Remedial Action (XXVI-A)
16.19.1 In continuation of the above orders Government may issue orders that
the candidate should be appointed only to a place where he is local
under the Presidential Order apart from the stipulation that he/she
should be appointed to a vacancy in the same department only. ●
MISCELLANEOUS DEVIATIONS
Deviation Genre No. XVIII
16.20.0 Finding No. 124-A In connection with the Finding No.124 in

SECTION-A PART-1 of the Final Report a reference was made to the
Government, which is available at Appendix XXX. ●
16.21.0 Finding No.126-A A freak case of misinterpretation of the expression

“local cadre” has occurred in School Education Commissionerate, when
the Commissioner called for applications for transfers from Teachers
who had put in at least two years in the “local cadre”. His interpretation
was that each post itself constitutes a “local cadre”!!! Thus a Secondary
Grade School Teacher was treated as a separate “local cadre” and
School Assistant in the same district was a separate local cadre, though
both posts are District Cadre Posts under the Presidential Order. By a
peculiar interpretation and specious logic, the Commissionerate insisted
on this preposterous connotation of local cadre. This connotation, if it
had not been set right by the Government on a reference from this
Commission, would have led to a very ridiculous situation and upset the
entire scheme of the Presidential Order. ●
16.21.1 Fortunately the Secretary, GAD (SPF) set the matters right through
U.O.Note, which may be seen at Appendix XXXI. The reference of this
Commission may also be seen at Appendix XXXII.
16.21.2 This Finding shows the far-reaching consequences with regard to

Presidential Order and its implementation, when Heads of Departments
take to unilateral and exotic interpretations and definitions of the basic
concepts and terminology of the presidential order. It points to the need
for continuing watch and institutional arrangement of a Nodal Agency.
Remedial Action (XXXV-A)
16.21.3 As has been pointed out in the main report there has to be a Nodal
Department preferably G.A (SPF) Department which should give all the
interpretations. No department should interpret any thing in the
Presidential Order on its own without clearance from the G.A (SPF)
Department, which should carefully examine the ramifications of the
interpretations. The power of interpretation is a very powerful
instrument that should be exercised by the highest authority, with
circumspection. Otherwise a whole legislation can be brought to
nought. In the legal system this is called judge made law and only at
the apex level it gets finality. ●
Post of Associate Lecturer in Polytechnics
16.22.0 The post of Associate Lecturer in Polytechnics was created as a gazetted

post in place of non-gazetted posts of Assistant Lecturers and
Demonstrators, with effect from 01.04.1981. From this date onwards
the post became a State-wide post under the Presidential Order but the
department obviously was in doubt and the Government ultimately
ordered in Memo No.470/TE.2/83-16, dt: 04.12.1990 and 470/TE.2/83-
20, dt: 20.08.1991, that the posts should be treated as State-wide
posts.
16.22.1 Again in 1998 in G.O.Ms.No.4 Education (TE.2) Dept., dt: 01.01.1998

the Government ordered that the post of Associate Lecturer should be
designated as “Lecturer”. The original post of Lecturer which was
already there in the Third Schedule of Presidential Order was ordered to
be re-designated as “Senior Lecturer”.
16.22.2 This is a glaring case of Presidential Order being given the go-by in the
process of gazetting of non-gazetted posts and re-designated of posts.
Hence the following findings:
16.23.0 Finding No.126-B The post of Associate Lecturer having been created
to replace two non-gazetted categories, should have continued to enjoy
the Zonal status as well as 70% reservation for locals regardless of
being gazetted and regardless of later re-designation as Lecturer. The
principle of immutability of a post under Presidential Order mentioned in
the SECTION-A, PART-1 of the Report should have been applied, after
obtaining Government of India‟s orders. ●
16.24.0 Finding No.126-C The original post of Lecturer which was in the Third
Schedule having been re-designated in 1998 as “Senior Lecturer” ceased
to be a part of Third Schedule by that re-designation, unless the
amendment was issued to Third Schedule. It had also become the
second gazetted post after the Associate Lecturer‟s post was created.
Now, having ceased to be in the Third Schedule since 1998 it should be
included in Third Schedule by the new designation retrospectively in
1998. ●
Remedial Action (XXXV-B)
16.24.1 All the recruitments and promotions to the post of Associate Lecturers
up to 1998 and as Lecturers (after re-designation from 01.01.1998
onwards) should be reviewed treating the post as Zonal with 70%
reservation for locals. This can be done only after Orders of
Government of India on the general issue where it is suggested to the
Government that the order may be obtained from the Government of
India that all posts gazetted after 18.10.1975 retain retrospectively their
Zonal/multi-zonal character as the case may be in as far as local area is
concerned and 70% reservation which was enjoyed by them prior to
gazetting. (Vide Para 8.9.0 (c) under Remedial Action XXV and
Appendix VI in Volume-II and Remedial Action XXV-A herein above).●
16.25.0 Finding 126-D Where a new organization comes under the

Presidential Order for the first time, local cadres should be formed
in this organization following the procedure laid down under Para 3
of the Presidential Order under the Scheme of Localisation of the
concerned Department as originally approved by the Government.
The specific case in point is taking over of the Degree College in
Kamareddy, which was originally an aided institution but was made

Govt. Degree College. In such cases the procedure of initial allotment
should have been followed under Para 4(2) of the Presidential order. ●
16.25.1 Please see this Commission‟s letter on the issue at Appendix XXXIII.
Remedial Action (XXXV-C)
16.25.2 Follow the procedure laid down under Para 4(2) of the Presidential
Order and subsequently treat the institution like any other Government
Organisation under the Presidential Order. Necessary transfers may be
effected after the action under Para 4(3) is taken, to bring in local
candidates. ●
16.26.0 Finding No. 126-E There may not be many Departments that
have no Service Rules. Civil Supplies Department is one such
Department. The Rules seem to be pending finalisation for years.
Even the One Man commission of Sri Sundaresan IAS (Retd) had
given its recommendations about 13 yrs ago. For the time being
some GOs have been serving the purpose of rules. Under the
Presidential Order the problem arises out of the fact that
promotions to the posts of Civil Supplies Dy. Tahsildars take place
from among the Senior Assistants of two excluded organisations of
the department namely Head of Department (under Para 14 (b)
and Chief Rationing Office (G.S.R.526 (E) issued under sub para
(1) of Para 2 of Presidential Order. These posting though on
promotion are made as “appointment by transfer” from excluded
organisations to Zones and are governed by Para 5 (2) (a) of the
Presidential Order which requires that these can be done only if there is
a provision in the rules. In the absence of the rules one would not know
how to justify these appointments by transfer. ●
16.26.1 There is another problem that all appointments by transfer which are
really in the nature of promotions have been held by the Supreme Court
to be violative of the Presidential Order as they are not covered by Para
5 (2) of the Presidential Order. This is a general problem which applies
to all the departments and Government have to find a solution to this
problem.
Remedial Action (XXXV-D)
16.26.2 (1) The Service Rules of Civil Supplies Department should be finalised in
terms of Sundaresan committee report without further delay to validate
the promotions retrospectively and to be applied prospectively.
16.26.3 (2) In case the appointment by transfers of Dy. Tahsildars is hit by the
Supreme Court judgement, which has been mentioned in our report
part-1 Finding No.50, the general solution that may be found under that
Finding may be applied to Civil Supplies Department also. ●
16.26.4 The Commission‟s letter addressed to the Government in this regard at

Appendix XXXIV.
16.27.0 Finding No. 126-F It is found in the case of Civil Supplies Dept,
Treasuries and Accounts Department, State Audit Department and
some other Departments that their Service Rules have not yet been
revised on the basis of the recommendations of the One Man
Commission of Sri Sundaresan IAS (Retd.). This Commission was

appointed in 1986 and for five years it went through the Service Rules of
all the Departments and gave recommendations for bringing them in
conformity with the provisions of the Presidential Order. If the revision
of Service Rules in accordance with the Commission‟s report is finalised
in all the departments many anomalies and deviations that one comes
across may be avoided. ●
Remedial Action (XXXV-E)

16.27.1 G.A.D (Services) may be made the Nodal Agency with necessary staff
support to give a special drive for the revision of all the Service Rules in
accordance with Sundaresan Commission Report. This work may also be
made a part of the Terms of Reference of the Implementation and
Monitoring Authority (IMA) proposed at Para 14.5.0 Chapter 14 of
SECTION-A, PART-1 of the Final Report.●
Conclusion
16.28.0 In this Part of the Report which covers the period from 01-10-2003 to
30-09-2004, no new Genres of Deviations have surfaced, but under the
existing Genres of Part-1, 24 new Findings under 11 different Genres of
Deviations have come to the fore which have gone into this Part of the
Report.
16.28.1 As already stated in Part – 1 of the Report it would be desirable to take

immediate action on the Proceedings which cover specific
Representations. Copies of these Proceedings for this Part are placed in
this Volume itself, as far as the period covered by this Part of the Report
is concerned.
16.28.2 Thirty years after the Presidential Order, a whole generation has
changed not only in society but also in the government set-up. Lack of
awareness, and even oblivion of the Presidential Order is therefore not
surprising. Many deviations are also traceable to this factor. The
Commission has suggested holding of Workshops involving Officials at
all level, separately, to refresh their knowledge and sharpen their
awareness and understanding, of the Presidential Order on Services.
The Commission‟s Report itself can be used as course material.
Hyderabad J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.)

Dated: ONE MAN COMMISSION (S.P.F.)
APPENDICES
APPENDICES
INDEX
No Appendix Page Nos.
XIII G.O.Rt.No.4762, G.A(SPF-A) Dept, Dt.9-10-2003 37 - 38
XIV G.O.Rt.No.1644, G.A (SPF) Dept, Dt.7-04-2004 39 - 40
XV D.O.Lr.No.4/Genl.I/OMC-QNR/03,Dt.07-11-2003 41 - 42
XVI Note on Composition of Staff in H.O.D offices 43 - 44
XVII Lr.No.14/OMC/B1/2002, Dt.10-05-2004. 45 - 46
XVIII D.O.Lr.No.11/OMC/MTGS/MA&UD/2001, 47 - 48
Dt.20-01-2004
XIX Lr.No.06/89/OMC(SPF)/B2/2001, Dt.06.05.2004 49 - 51
XX Lr.No.06/74/OMC/B1/2001, Dt.06-05-2004 52 - 55
XXI D.O.Lr.No.11/OMC/B2-(TEA)/2003,Dt.29-9-2003. 56
XXII Lr.No.06/36/OMC/A2/2001-11, Dt.06-05-2004 57 - 58
XXIII Lr.No06/65/OMC/A2/2001-10, Dt.06-04-2004 59 - 61
XXIV Lr.No.OMC/A2/A&C/2003-4, Dt.31-01-2004 62 - 63
XXV Lr.No.11/OMC/B1/S.E/2004, Dt.10-05-2004 64 - 65
XXVI Lr.No.11/OMC/I & CAD/A1/2001, Dt.11-03-2004 66 - 67
XXVII Lr.No.11/OMC/PRE-B.2/2003, Dt.07-05-2004 68 - 70
XXVIII Lr.No.02/OMC/QNR/A2/2001-20, Dt.29-04-2004 71 - 72
XXIX Lr.No.06/86/OMC/A1/2002-3, Dt.05-05-2004 73 - 74
XXX Lr.No.06/59/OMC/B1/2001, Dt.25-02-2004 75 - 77
XXXI U.O.Note No.170647/SPF-A/2003,Dt.31-12-2003 78 - 79
XXXII D.O.Lr.No.OMC(SPF)/Peshi/2003, Dt.15-12-2003 80 - 81
XXXIII Lr.No.11/OMC/NZBD/6/2003, Dt.07-05-2004 82 - 83
XXXIV Lr.No.11/OMC/B1/ANTPR/2003, Dt.07-05-2004 84 - 86
XXXV G.O.Rt.No.233, G.A(SPF-A) Dept, Dt.08-08-2003 87 - 88

No Appendix Page Nos.
XXXVI Lr.No.06/89/OMC/A1/2003, Dt.15-07-2004 89 - 92
XXXVII Lr.No.11/OMC/LET&F/LO(Enf.)B1/2004,
Dt.01-09-2004 93 - 94
XXXVIII Lr.No.11/OMC/B2/WDHCP/2003, Dt.16-09-2004 95 - 96
XXXIX Minutes of Meeting on 09-09-2004 with

Commissioner, Juvenile welfare, Correctional
Services & Welfare of Street Children 97 - 98
XXXX Minutes of Meeting on 16-09-2004 with the

Director of Youth Services 99
Appendix - XIII

ABSTRACT
ESTABLISHMENT – Six Point Formula – A.P. Public Employment (OLC & RDR)
Order, 1975 – Implementation of G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-
A) Department, dated 30-12-1985 – One Man Commission with Sri J.M. Girglani,
IAS., (Retd.) – Constituted – Extension of term of office of One Man Commission
for a period of six months with effect from 1-10-2003 to 31-03-2004 – Order –
Issued.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SPF-A) DEPARTMENT
G.O.Rt.No.4762, Dated:9-10-2003.
Read the following:
1. G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-A) Department,

dt. 30-12-1985.
2. G.O.Ms.No.270, GA(SPF-A) Department, dated 25-6-2001.
6. G.O.Ms.No.874, GA(SCF-A) Department, dated 19-2-2003.
7. Govt.Memo.No.29734/SPF-A/2002-3, G.A(SPF-A)Dept.
dated29.4.2003.
8. G.O.Rt.No.2755, G.A(SPF-A) Dept., dated 17-6-2003.
10.Note dated 29-9-2003 from the Prl. Secretary to Chief
Minister.
***
ORDER:
In continuation of the orders issued in G.O. 8th read above, Government

extended the term of office of Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS., (Retd.) as One Man
Commission (Six Point Formula) for a further period of six months with effect
from 1.10.2003 to 31.3.2004.
2. The period of extension will also apply to Sri P. Mohal Lal, Ex-Officio Joint
Secretary and OSD to the Commission on contract basis. The Secretariat
assistance provided to the Commission will also be continued till 31.3.2004.
3. Permission is also extended to hire the private vehicles as ordered in G.O.

9th read above up to 31.3.2004 as a Special case and in relaxation of quarterly
regulation orders.
4. The expenditure on the „One Man Commission‟ shall be debitable to the

Head of Account “2052 – Secretariat General Services – (090) Secretariat –
S.H(04) – G.A.D.-130 – Office Expenses – 132 Other Office Expenses – (010) –
Salaries”.
5. This order issues with the concurrence of Finance Department vide their
U.O.No.7329/244/Expr.GAD.I/A1/03, dated 1-10-2003.
(BY ORDER AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH)
B. ARAVINDA REDDY
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (SER.)
To
Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS., (Retd.), H.No.7-1-69/2, (New 640), Dharamkaram Road,
Ameerpet, Hyderabad.
Copy to:
The P.S. to Prl. Secretary to C.M. w.r.t.3810/N/CMP/2003, dated 29-9-2003.
The P.S. to Chief Secretary to Government.
The P.S. to OMC (SPF), K.Block, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
The P.S. to Secretary to Govt., (Ser.), Genl. Admn. Dept.
The Accountant General, A.P., Hyderabad.
The Pay & Accounts Officer, Hyderabad.
The Dy. Pay & Accounts Officer, Secretariat Branch, Hyderabad
The G.A. (Claims A, B, C, OP.I, II, III, IV, SB) Department
ST/SC
//FORWARDED BY ORDER//
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
Appendix - XIV

ABSTRACT
Order, 1975 – Implementation of G.O.Ms.No.610, General Administration (SPF-
A) Department, dated 30-12-1985 – One Man Commission with Sri J.M. Girglani,
IAS., (Retd.) – Constituted – Extension of term of office of One Man Commission
for a period of six months with effect from 1-4-2004 to 30-09-2004 – Order –
Issued.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.O.Rt.No.1644. Dated:7-4-2004.
Read the following:

dt. 30-12-1985.
6. G.O.Ms.No.874, GA(SCF-A) Department, dated 19-2-2003.
7. Govt.Memo.No.29734/SPF-A/2002-3, G.A(SPF-A) Dept.
dated 29.4.2003.
10.Note dated 29-9-2003 from the Prl. Secretary to Chief Minister.
11.G.O.Rt.No.4762, G.A(SPF-A) Dept., dated 9-10-2003.
12. Note dated nil from the Prl. Secretary to Chief Minister.
***
ORDER:
In continuation of the orders issued in G.O. 11th read above,

Government extended the term of office of Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS.,
(Retd.) as One Man Commission (Six Point Formula) for a further period of six
months with effect from 1.4.2004 to 30.9.2004.
2. The period of extension will also apply to Sri P. Mohal Lal, Ex-Officio Joint
Secretary and OSD to the Commission on contract basis. The Secretariat
assistance provided to the Commission will also be continued till 30.9.2004.
3. Permission is also extended to hire the private vehicles as ordered in G.O.

th
9 read above up to 30.9.2004 as a Special case and in relaxation of quarterly
regulation orders.
4. The expenditure on the „One Man Commission‟ shall be debitable to the

Head of Account “2052 – Secretariat General Services – (090) Secretariat –
S.H(04) – G.A.D.-130 – Office Expenses – 132 Other Office Expenses – (010) –
Salaries”.
5. This order issues with the concurrence of Finance Department vide their
U.O.No.2466/FS(R&E)/04, dated 31.03.2004.
B. ARAVINDA REDDY
To
Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS., (Retd.), H.No.7-1-69/2, (New 640), Dharamkaram Road,
Ameerpet, Hyderabad.
Copy to:
The P.S. to Prl. Secretary to C.M. w.r.t. the note.
The P.S. to Chief Secretary to Government.
The P.S. to OMC (SPF), K.Block, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
The P.S. to Secretary to Govt., (Ser.), Genl. Admn. Dept.
The Accountant General, A.P., Hyderabad.
The Pay & Accounts Officer, Hyderabad.
The Dy. Pay & Accounts Officer, Secretariat Branch, Hyderabad
The G.A. (Claims A, B, C, OP.I, II, III, IV, SB) Department
ST/SC
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
Appendix XV

CHIEF SECRETARY
Dr. Mohan Kanda, I.A.S. Hyderabad-500 022.
D.O.Lr.No.4/Genl.I/OMC-QNR/03, dt.07-11-2003
Dear
Sub: Six Point Formula – One Man Commission – Furnishing of information

by Departments.
Ref: 1. G.O.Ms.No.270, GA (SPF.A) Dept., dated 25-06-01.

2. D.O.Lr.No.OMC/Genl.I, dated 19-07-01 from Sri P.V. Rao, IAS.,
Chief Secretary.
3. D.O.Lr.No.4/OMC (Estt.)/2002, dated 05-08-02 from Sri K.
Swaminathan, IAS., Chief Secretary.
4. D.O.Lr.No.OMC/QNR/2/A/01, dated 21-06-02 from Sri J.M.
Girglani, IAS (Retd.), OMC (SPF).
The One Man Commission (SPF) appointed by the Government in

G.O.Ms.No.270 first cited above has informed that it has received reports in the
nine proformas sent to the Departments in booklet form only from about 37% of
the Heads of Departments, in spite of letters from the Commission, from my
predecessors and also meetings held by the Commission with the
representatives of all the Heads of Departments and Secretariat Departments.
The Commission has been functioning for the last two years and four months.
While it has been formulating the various issues and findings, it cannot complete
the report without certain figures required by it.
The Government have also desired that the Commission dispose of the
representations received by it. Some of the representations are still pending for
want of reports from the Departments.
The Commission will also be writing to you to work out the effect of the
deviations, which it will communicate to you, in each local cadre (district/zone)
so that the exact impact of the deviations would be clear for all the local areas of
the whole state to leave no room for any speculation or doubt. This would put
the report in a proper perspective.
Please take urgent action and ask your Heads of Departments to send
their reports without any further delay. It would be necessary also to convene a
meeting of the Heads of Departments for getting quicker results.
Yours sincerely,
Sd/-
(MOHAN KANDA)
To
The Special Chief Secretaries, Principal Secretaries and Secretaries to the
Government, Government of A.P, Hyderabad.
Appendix XVI
Note on „Composition of staff in Existing H.O.D.

offices‟
Only 52 departments have responded and in all the status is as

under:
Composition of staff No.
Total Posts below L.D.C. level 1699

Locals of Hyderabad Dist. 1378 (81.1%)
Locals of other Districts 321
Total Posts of L.D.C. level 1078

Locals of Hyderabad Dist. 446 (41.4%)
Locals of other Districts 632
Total No. of NGO posts above LDC level 2496

Locals of Zone VI 982 (39.3 %)
Locals of other Zones 1514
Total No. of Gazetted Posts 606

Locals of Zone VI 221 (36.5%)
Total No. of posts which appear in Third schedule 153

Locals of Zone VI 62 (40.5 %)
PLEASE SEE THE TABLE SHOWING THE

INFORMATION ON COMPOSITION OF STAFF IN
HOD OFFICES IN THE EXCEL FORMAT AT THE
END OF THE REPORT.
Appendix XVII
ONE MAN COMMISSION (SPF)
Lr.No.14/OMC/B1/2002, dated 10.05.2004
From
J.M. Girglani,IAS., (Retd.)
One Man Commission (SPF)
Room No: 320, „K‟ Block,
2nd Floor, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad.
To
The Secretary to Government (Services),
General Administration Department,
A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC – SPF – Education (H.E) Department – Violation of

PresidentialOrder in transfers – Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from Dr. G. Vijaya Rama Rao, EX-MLA, Gajwel

Constituency, Medak dated nil.
2. From the Director of Collegiate Education
Lr.Rc.No.2014/OP I-1/2001, dt.25-02-2003.
3. From the RJD of Collegiate Education (FAC), Warangal
Lr.No. 2079/A1/B1/2002, dt. 24-06-2003 addressed to
Director of Collegiate Education, Hyderabad and copied
to One Man Commission (SPF).
4. OMC (SPF) Lr.No. 14/OMC/B1/2002, dated 23.07.2003.
5. OMC (SPF) Lr.No. 14/OMC/B1/2002, dated 09.02.2004 addressed
to the Director of Collegiate Education and copied to the Secretary
to Government G.A. (SPF) Department.
6. From the RJD of Collegiate Education, Warangal
Rc.No.505/A2/2004, dated 19.03.2004.
* * *
It came to the notice of the Commission through an individual

representation that certain transfers have been effected in the Department of
Intermediate Education in violation of the Presidential
Order in the cadres of Junior Assistants / Senior
Assistants. Certain Junior Assistants and Senior Assistants were transferred from
the Government Junior/ Degree Colleges to the Office of the Regional Joint
Director, Collegiate Education which were covered by the Rule 16-A of the A.P.
Ministerial Service Rules, as amended vide G.O.Ms.No. 803, G.A.D., dated
29.12.1980. But the transfers made from one College to another though within a
Zone or District did not have the sanction of Presidential Order under that Rule.
The Commission has examined the issue in consultation with the Director
of Collegiate Education and took a view that in respect of “Regional Offices” the
provision under Para 5 (2) (b) of the Presidential Order has been adequately
dealt with in GOP No.728 dt: 01.11.1975 at Para 10 (b). This Para has been
incorporated almost verbatim in AP Ministerial Service Rules as Rule 16-A vide
G.O.Ms.No. 803, G.A (Services. B) Dept., dt: 29.12.1980. This Rule has been
mutilated out of context and mis-applied for inter-zonal transfers within a
Region. One case has come to the notice of this Commission but it could be the
tip of an iceberg.
The Commission suggests that instructions may be issued by GAD (Ser.)

and SPF that this Rule in the Ministerial Service Rules does not permit inter-
cadre transfers either between Districts for District cadre posts or between
Zones for Zonal cadre posts even within a Region. The Rule is only to facilitate
transfers between the Regional Office and the subordinate offices in the Region
and vice versa, as amplified in Para 10 (b) of the G.O.P. No. 728, G.A (SPF)
Department, dated 01-11-1975.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to the Prl. Secretary to Government, Education (H.E) Department, A.P.

Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Copy to the Director of Collegiate Education, Near Lata Talkies, Nampally,

Hyderabad.
Appendix XVIII

J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS., (Retd) Room No.320,

One Man Commission (SPF) „K‟ Block, 2nd Floor,
A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad-22
Ph:(O) 040-23452663
Tele Fax: 040-23452663
D.O.Lr.No.11/OMC/MTGS/MA&UD/2001- , Dt.20-01-2004
Dear
Sub: OMC – SPF – Position of Urban Development Authorities under the

Presidential Order.
Ref:1. Proceedings of OMC Meeting dt.25-01-2003 (copy Enclosed).

2. OMC Lr.No.11/OMC/MTGS/B2/MA&UD/2001, dt.4.2.2003
3. From the Administrator, QQSUDA Lr.No.A1/624/2002, Dt.22-12-
2003
***
Kindly refer the references cited. At the meeting held with the Municipal
Administration and Urban Development Department and Heads of Departments
under their control on 23rd January, 2003 an important issue came up, the gist
of which is given below. These were already communicated.
“ The important issue that is to be examined is whether the UDAs other

than HUDA are parts of government departments and therefore subjected to the
Presidential Order strictly like the subordinate offices of the Department. The
Andhra Pradesh Urban Areas (Development) Act. 1975 classifies these Urban
Development Authorities as „bodies corporate‟ like all other statutory corporate
bodies. But nowhere does it mention that they are “local bodies”. Since they are
“bodies corporate”, they cannot also be classified as parts of a department of
government.
Since they are statutory bodies, they cannot be classified as government

companies. The Income Tax authorities have taken a view, as mentioned by
Secretary, Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority, that while local bodies
are exempted from Income-Tax the Urban Development Authorities not being
local bodies are subjected to Income-Tax “from this year onwards”. Since it is
not established so far, as to whether all UDAs (excepting HUDA) are part of
government department or local bodies, the Government may take a view and if
they consider it expedient, may write to Government of India to extend the
application of Presidential Order to other Urban Development Authorities on par
with HUDA as statutorily they are all on par, being the creations of the same
Act.”
It appears that the reason why the other Urban Development Authorities
were not included in the Presidential Order is simply that they did not exist at
the time of the Presidential Order while HUDA did. Therefore it is logical to
extend to these authorities the same provisions of the Presidential as applies to
HUDA. I request you to kindly take up the matter with the Government of India
through General Administration (SPF) Department and obtain the necessary
consent of the Government of India to such a proposal.
This will remove undefined position of these authorities under the

Presidential Order.
Kindly take necessary action in the matter. I shall be thankful if you kindly
keep the Commission informed so that on this issue the latest position can be
included in my Report.
With regards,
Yours sincerely,
Sd/
(J.M.GIRGLANI)
Sri S.R.RAO, IAS
Principal Secretary to Government
M.A. & U.D. Department
A.P. Secretariat
Hyderabad.
Copy to
1). Sri B.Arvinda Reddy, IAS, Secretary to Government, G.A. (Services & SPF)
Department with the same request.
2). Report File.
Appendix XIX

Lr.No. 06/89/OMC (SPF)/B2/2001, dated 06.05.2004
From
2nd Floor, A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
To
The Secretary to Government (Services & SPF),
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – A.P. Panchayati Raj Subordinate Services - Village

Development Officers, Grade-II – Promotion to the post of Village
Development Officer, Grade-I – Clarification – Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation of Sri Nori Kama Sastry, dt. 14-07-2001.

2. G.O.Ms.No.979, Panchayati Raj (Estt.VI) Dept., dated 08-11-1979.
* * *
Sri Nori Kama Sastry, V.D.O., Buttyagudem Mandal, West Godavari
District represented that in East Godavari and Krishna districts promotions were
given to the Village Development Officers, Grade-II to the post of Village
Development Officer, Grade-I on the basis of the respective district seniorities,
to the vacancies in the district, thus depriving him of his seniority in the
promotion to the post of Extension Officer, Panchayats since his juniors from
other Districts in the Zone stole a march over him.
It appears from the above that the promotions have been based on district
as a unit confining the promotions to district vacancies and on the basis of
district seniority.
Under the Presidential Order the posts of Village Development Officers,

Grade-I and Grade-II fall under the category of Zonal posts under sub-Para 3 of
Para-3. The promotion to a Zonal post i.e., to the post of VDO, Grade-I has to
be confined to the vacancies within the zone and on the basis of Zonal seniority
of the lower post, in this case of the VDO, Grade-II. Hence giving promotions to
the post of VDO, Grade-I district-wise on the basis of district seniorities and for
district vacancies is a contravention of the Presidential Order.
Perhaps this error has occurred because the A.P. Panchayati Raj
Subordinate Service Rules for the posts of Village Development Officers, specify
the “District” as “unit of appointment”. “Unit of appointment” is different from
“local area” as contemplated in Para 3 of the Presidential Order. The seniorities
of the V.D.O, Grade-II may be maintained district-wise, but when it comes to
promotions to the post of Village Development Officer, Grade-I, these district-
wise seniorities are to be integrated into a Zonal seniority and promotions given
on the basis of such seniority to the vacancies within the zone. In many
Departments “units of appointment” are discrete parts of a zone but when
promotions are given to Zonal posts, it is the Zonal vacancies that are taken into
account and the seniorities of the various “units of appointment” are integrated
into a single Zonal seniority.
It is also seen from A.P. Panchayat Raj Subordinate Service Rules for the
posts of Village Development Officers, that the rules are of 1979 given effect to
on 23.9.75. The Government had appointed One Man Commission of Sri
Sundaresan,IAS(Retd.) to revise all the rules to bring them into conformity with
the Presidential Order. Perhaps this would have been done for these rules also.
If that is so it will be better to implement the Sundaresan Committee Report
with regard to these rules and revise them accordingly. The Rules as they stand
carry a Provision under Rule 4, incorporating the provisions of the Presidential
Order which made them Zonal Posts with 70% reservation for locals.
Promotions given to the post of Village Development Officer, Grade-I on

the district-wise basis are, therefore, have to be reviewed and looked into again
in the light of the above mentioned position.
Notwithstanding the fact that the rules are of 1979, the position in the
Presidential Order as mentioned herein above would remain unchanged and the
review of the promotions whenever to be undertaken is to be done, followed by
the consequential follow-up action.
It is further seen that under G.O.Ms.No.369,PR&RD(Mandal-I)

Department, dt.12.12.2001 creating the posts of Village Secretaries the position
with regard to the Village Development Officers as mentioned above would
remain unchanged and all promotions would have to be reviewed accordingly.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to :The Prl. Secretary to Government, PR & RD Department,

Copy to : The Commissioner of Panchayati Raj & Rural Employment, Panchayat

Raj Bhavan, Urdu Hall Lane, Himayatnagar, Hyderabad.
Copy to : The Secretary, A.P. Public Service Commission, “Gruha Kalpa”,

Opp. Gandhi Bhavan, Nampally, Hyderabad for information and
necessary action.
Appendix XX

Lr. No.06/74/OMC/B1/2001, dated 06.05.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
The Secretary to Government (Services & SPF),
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad. (w.e)
Sir,
Sub: OMC - SPF – Intermediate Education – Appointment and transfer of

Part-time Junior Lecturers – Clarification - Reg.
Ref: OMC(SPF) Lr.No.06/74/OMC/B1/2001,dated 15-10-2003.
* * *
It was found in the Intermediate Education Department in the case of

appointments of Part-time Junior Lecturers that their initial appointment was
made in certain Zones without observing the Presidential Order with regard to
local area or reservation of local candidates. Subsequent to this initial violation
in appointment, violation of Presidential Order was again done when the
regularization of Part-time Junior Lecturers was taken up. They were regularized
in the same Zones in which they were working. Since regularization was a direct
appointment in a full time post the Presidential Order on local areas and local
candidates have been violated. This is the second violation in respect of these
posts.
The third violation took place when the regularized Part-time Junior
Lecturers were “transferred” to their “native districts” and were placed not in the
last rank as per the Rules, but were given the rank with reference to a certain
date - date of the issue of the G.O.Ms.No. 259, Education, dated 12-10-1999
thus disturbing the seniorities of those who were selected regularly by the
APCSC/APPSC. In fact they should have been appointed originally in their Local
Zones and if there was a vacancy, and not first appointed in the Zones where
they were non-locals and then transferred and given a particular date. The
whole process is in contravention of the Para 5 of the Presidential Order and the
General Rules. Even in the transfer orders the word “native” is used and not a
“local candidate”. Therefore one does not know whether they were transferred,
where they were “local candidates” or where they were “natives” but not
necessarily “locals”.
Hence, I would request you to look into this matter and ensure the issue of
necessary instructions in the case of all Part-time Junior Lectures regularized or
yet to be regularized, for a review as the regularization should take place on the
basis of their “local status” only in the vacancies in the Zones in which they are
locals. Part-time appointment and regularization are also in the nature of a
direct appointments even though it is initially considered to be temporary.
Necessary consequential action of fixing seniority etc. may be taken after such a
review. Non-regularized Part-time Junior Lecturers may also be reshuffled so
that only local candidates occupy the posts.
A copy of the Proceedings issued vide the reference cited is enclosed

herewith.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to the Prl. Secretary to Government, Education (Higher Education)

Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Copy to the Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education, Near Lata

Talkies, Nampally, Hyderabad.

Lr.No.06/74/OMC/B1/2001, Dt. 15-10-2003.
From
Hyderabad.
To
The Commissioner of Intermediate Education,
Near Latha Talkies,
Nampally,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC – SPF – Implementation of G.O.Ms.No.610, G.A (SPF A) Dept,

Dt.30-12-1985 and provisions of Presidential Order 1975 – Representations from
individuals – Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from S/Sri. T. Jagannadham, Jr. Lecturer in

Chemistry, Medak District, A.J Harish Kumar, Junior Lecturer in
English, Medak, M. Jhansi Lakshmi, Junior Lecturer in Chemistry,
Medak received by the One Man Commission on 17-09-2001.
2. Your Lr.Rc.No.Ser.II-1/3598/01, dt.03-07-2002.
3. Representation from Dr. C.H. Goverdhan, Jr. Lecturer in Chemistry,
Nalgonda dt.09-07-2002.
4. Your Lr.Rc.No.7639/C2/2001, dt.14-11-01 and 21-11-01.
* * *
I invite your attention to the references cited, regarding the repatriation of

the part time Lecturers to their respective “native zones” without foregoing any
service rendered, in proceedings Rc.No.4606/B1/2000, dt.20-10-2000, which
gave raise to this representation.
On this issue the Commission observes that the part – time Lecturers
should have been adjusted not in their “native zones” as was done vide the
proceedings issued in pursuance of the Government Orders in G.O.Ms. No. 259,
Education, dated 12-10-1999 but only to the zones in which they would be “local
candidates under Presidential Order”.
I therefore, request you to take necessary action in the matter, and review
the order accordingly under intimation to the Commission.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
for One Man Commission (SPF)
Copy to: 1. Sri T.Jagannadham, Jr. Lecturer in Chemistry, Government

Junior College, Shankarampet (R) Medak District.
2. Sri A.J Harish Kumar, Jr. Lecturer in English, Government
Junior College (Boys), Medak 502 110.
3. M.Jhansi Lakshmi, Junior Lecturer in Chemistry,
Government Junior College (Girls), Siddipet, Medak District
4. Dr C.H.Goverdhan, Junior Lecturer in Chemistry,
Government Junior College, Suryapet, Nalgonda District.
Appendix XXI

Ph:(O) 040-23452663
Tele Fax: 040-23452663
D.O.Lr.No.11/OMC/B2-(TEA)/2003, Dated: 29-09-2003
Dear
I enclose a copy of the representation of Telangana Employees Association

dated 27th September, 2003 which must have come to you also, as a copy has
been marked to the Chief Secretary. The inter-zonal transfers mentioned in this
representation have been permitted by the government in M.A. & U.D.
department through G.O.Rt.No.1157, dt.25/8/2003. The G.O. has been issued
with the concurrence of Finance (W&M) Department. The inter-zonal transfers
under the present government orders had been banned. Even if they are
effected they should be routed through G.A. (SPF) Department and the file has
to go up to Chief Minister‟s level. It is not indicated in this G.O. whether this
procedure was followed. In case this has been done and the ban order on
transfers has been relaxed in these cases, and also your department has agreed
with these transfers and Chief Minister has also approved them, there is no
action that this Commission need suggest on the petition. However, if that has
not been done then you may like to take up the matter with M.A. & U.D.
Department and place the matter before the Honorable Chief Minister with
regard to two aspects.
1) Effecting inter-zonal transfers while ban is continuing.

2) Effecting inter-zonal transfers without the procedure laid down.
With regards,
Yours sincerely,
Sd/-
(J.M.GIRGLANI)
Sri B.ARVINDA REDDY, IAS
Secretary to Government
G.A.(Service & SPF) Department
A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad. (w.e)
Appendix XXII
Lr.No. 06/36/OMC/A2/2001-11, dated 06.05.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
The Secretary to Government,
General Administration (Services) Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Treasuries and Accounts Department – Certain transfers
to HOD in violation of Presidential Order – Clarification – Reg.
***
In a case of an individual representation from the Department of
Treasuries and Accounts it has been observed that certain individuals were
appointed by transfer from Branch Offices from different districts, on request/ on
tenure basis, in the Office of the Head of Department. The Government in
Finance Department have permitted their retention in the Head Office from the
date of their joining in the Director of Treasuries and Accounts and subsequently
on a proposal from the Director of Treasuries and Accounts, have also permitted
the Director of Treasuries and Accounts to fix the seniority of those individuals
as per their dates of completion of probation in their respective branch offices in
the Districts vide Memo.No. 16687/548/Admn.I/83, Finance Department, dated
15.12. 1984. This decision created objection from the employee who was
allotted to the Head of Department, by the APPSC much ahead of their date of
joining the Head of Department Office.
The Commission discussed the issue in detail with the Officials of the O/o.
Directorate of Treasuries and Accounts and found that the transfer of persons
which was done on their request was ab initio violative of the Presidential Order
and also violative of the Rule 3 of the A.P. Treasuries and Accounts Subordinate
Service Special Rules as there was “nil panel” of vacancies in the year of their
transfers to Head Office, as informed by the Joint Director. There is no other rule
for transfer in their Service Rules that could save such transfer under Para 5(2)
(a) of the Presidential Order.
Two other issues that came to light in this regard are
(1) with regard to the permission accorded by Government for the

retention of the employees who were posted on tenure basis in the
Head of the Department, and
(2) to determine the seniorities on the basis of the date of completion of

probation in the Branch offices, in their farmer local cadre and not with
reference to the dates of their transfer to the later cadre as per 5 (2)
(a) of the Presidential Order.
These issues are to be looked into and necessary remedial action taken
and instructions issued.
It was also found that the Service Rules of the Treasuries and Accounts
Department have not yet been revised on the basis of the recommendations of
the One Man Commission of Sri Sundaresan, IAS (Retd.) which were formulated
in conformity with the provisions of the Presidential Order. The Treasuries and
Accounts Department are following the Rules issued in 1963 vide G.O.Ms.No.
201, Finance (Administration) Department, dated 08.03.1963. If the revision of
Service Rules in accordance with the Sundaresan Commission‟s report is
finalized in the department many anomalies and deviations that one comes
across may be avoided.
I am to request you to give a special drive for the revision of the Service
Rules in accordance with Sundaresan Commission report.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to
Finance (Admn.) Department
The Director,
Treasuries and Accounts Department,
A.P., Hyderabad.
Appendix XXIII

Lr.No. 6/65/OMC/A2/2001–10, dt. 06.04.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
G.A (Services & SPF) Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – I&PR Dept. – Representation submitted on violation
of SPF and G.O.No.610 in I&PR Dept. – Reg.
Ref: 1.From the President, Telangana Udyogula Ikya Vedika, Hyderabad,

Representation dated 04-09-2001 and
30-04-2003.
2.From the Director I&PR Department, Lr.No.16860/Admn-I-1/2001,
dated 02-07-2002 and 09-01-2004.
***
It is seen in the case of I & PR Department that while there are no posts
created at any time in the office of the HOD, the office of the Head of
Department have been using posts of DPROs, Dy. E.I.Es A.E.I.Es, Divl. PROs,
A.P.R.Os, A.I.Es, Inf. Technicians and Cine-Operators by taking them from the
subordinate offices at random. In the G.O.Ms.No. 554 G.A (I & PR) Department
dated 15-07-76 issued for organization of local cadres in the Department,
however, some of these posts were added to the sanctioned strength of the
Head Office. The issue is that there cannot be “deputation” from subordinate
offices to the head office to posts which are not in the sanctioned strength of the
Head Office. Deputation can only be to sanctioned posts.
2. As per the report of the Director of I & PR, the following posts were
sanctioned as “tenure posts” in the aforesaid G.O. and the numbers indicated
against each post shows the number of posts sanctioned in the G.O. and the
number of posts being utilized in that particular category respectively:-
i) DPROs - 2 - 5 Posts
ii) Dy. E.I.Es - 1 - 2 Posts
iii) A.E.I.Es - 3 - 3 Posts
iv) Divl. PROs - Nil - 6 Posts
v) A.P.R.Os - 10 - 9 Posts
vi) A.I.Es - 6 - 5 Posts
vii) Inf. Technicians - 1 - 1 Post
viii) Cine-Operators - 3 - 3 Posts
As may be seen above the posts of Divl. PROs were not sanctioned in the
G.O.Ms.No.554 but are being utilized in the HOD. As for the other posts the
posts are either utilized in excess of the sanction or less than the sanction,
giving indication of deviation.
3. The Director I&PR Department has also submitted that after organization
of local cadres, all appointments/recruitments to the various categories of posts
in the local cadre have been regulated in accordance with Presidential Order. But
certain categories of posts which are existing in the Directorate and which have
been localized into zonal cadres are treated as “tenure posts” for drawal of
candidates from the respective zones.
4. The Director, I & PR has further stated that the posts being filled in the
Directorate on “tenure basis” from the candidates of those zones only on
obtaining their willingness duly taking into consideration the administrative
requirements in the Directorate.
5. In as far as the Presidential Order is concerned having posts in the Head

Office without there being a sanctioned strength for them tantamounts to
transfer of posts themselves from the zones to the Head Office depriving the
zones of these posts and their local candidates of direct recruitment &
promotions to these posts. Such utilisation is a deviation from the Presidential
Order because those are zonal posts and not Head Office posts.
6. Hence, I request you to kindly advise the Director, I & PR that his action is
not only untenable from the point of view of service rules, FRs and budget
aspects but, as far as this Commission is concerned, it is violative of Presidential
Order. This matter may kindly be got set-right. If the Department needs the
posts in HOD office they should get them sanctioned for the Head Office
separately and not divert them from the zones. Otherwise such posts cannot be
utilized in the Head Office. As you are aware in Excise Department shifting of
posts to other zones was objected to by the House Committee and the
Government reversed the shifting.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Appendix XXIV

Lr.No. OMC/A2/A&C/2003-4, dated 31.01.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
G.A. (SPF) Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Cooperation Department – Representaion submitted by

TNGO‟s Central Union, Hyderabad, on transfer of Sri Mohd.
Muneeruddin, C.S.R., O/o. CC & RCS, Hyderabad from the Head of
the Department to zone – VI – Reg.
Ref: OMC (SPF) Lr.No.OMC/A2/A&C/2003-2, dt. 15-11-2003.
* * *
It is seen in the case of Department of Cooperation that while there are no

posts of CSRs created at any time in the office of the Commissioner and
Registrar of Cooperative Societies, i.e., the Office of the Head of Department
they have been using CSRs within the HOD either by taking them from the
subordinate offices at random or even promoting persons within Head Office to
such post in the Head Office when no such posts are in the sanctioned strength
of the Head Office. There are therefore two issues in this (1). There cannot be
promotion to post in the Head Office which is not a sanctioned post at all
(2). There cannot be “deputation” from subordinate offices to the head office to
posts which are not in the sanctioned strength of the Head Office. Deputation
can only be to sanctioned posts.
In as far as the Presidential Order is concerned having posts of CSR in the

Head Office without there being a sanctioned strength for them tantamounts to
transfer of posts from the zones to the Head Office depriving the zones of these
posts and their local candidates of direct recruitment & promotions to these
posts. Similarly, promotions to such non-existent posts from within the Head
Office is wrong from the point of view service rules and FRs. From the
Presidential order point of view such promotion is wrong because these are zonal
posts and not head office posts and therefore if any promotion is to be given it
should be in the zones and not from out of the head office staff.
Similar thing has happened in another department on which I shall be

writing to you separately. I request you to kindly advise the Registrar that his
action is not only wrong from the point of view of service rules, FRs and budget
aspects but, in as far as this Commission is concerned, it is wrong from the point
of view of Presidential Order. This matter may please be got set-right. If the
Department needs the posts of CSR in HOD Office he should get them
sanctioned for the Head Office separately and not divert them from the zones.
Otherwise such posts cannot be utilized in the Head Office. In Excise
Department shifting of posts to other zones was objected to by the House
Committee and the Government reversed the shifting.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to
The Prl. Secretary to Government,

Agriculture & Co-operation (Coop.) Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
The Commissioner for Cooperation and

Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Hyderabad.
Appendix XXV

Lr. No.11/OMC/B1/S.E/2004, dated 10.05.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC – SPF – Violation of Presidential Order in the School

Education Department S.C.E.R.T. – Regading.
Ref: Representation from Sri P.N. Murthy, Retd. Principal,

New Nallakunta, Hyderabad dated 04.03.2004.
* * *
Sri P. N. Murthy, Retd. Principal, represented that Smt. Rama Devi

Lecturer in DIET in Zone-IV was brought to SCERT and is continued there as a
Lecturer since 1998.
The issue has been examined by this Commission in detail and it was
found that in G.O.Ms.No. 572, Education Department, dated 24.05.1976,
Government has ordered that five posts of Lecturers in the Collegiate Cell of the
SCERT, need not be taken into account for computing the effective cadre
strength of the local cadres but should be treated as “Floating Posts” and be
filled by rotation from different local cadres equitably. Neither the general
service rules nor the F.R.s have any concept like “Floating Posts” which have
been described in the G.Os as the posts to which the persons in that category
can be appointed by rotation.
The SCERT has been included in the G.S.R. 527,as a “State Level Office” at
Sl.No.30A. Obviously this position is subsequent to the aforesaid G.O. which is
of 1976. Even at that time this floating posts concept violated G.O.P.728 dated
1.11.75. After the inclusion of the Organization in G.S.R.527 deputations in the
organization come squarely under G.O.P.728 Paras 9(B) and 11. The “Floating
Posts” becomes invalid. But it was not deleted and the violation of the
Presidential Order continues from the date of this G.O. and is further aggravated
after inclusion of the Institute under G.S.R. 527.
What makes this issue poignant is the grievance that one single person
has been continuing in a “Floating Post” for the last six years and she is alleged
to be the wife of an important officer of the Department of School Education.
Even a normal deputation is for three years. Neither the principle of equitable
fair share of Paras 9 B and 11 of G.O.P. 728 nor even the rotation and equitable
principle of the G.O. of “Floating Posts” has been respected in the case of this
favoured lady.
Hence it is suggested that the existing deputationists who have completed

three years may be replaced and deputationists may be taken on the equitable
basis under Paras 9(B) and 11 of G.O.P.728, dated 01.11.75 from other Zones
particularly those Zones which have not got the opportunity so far.
I request you to kindly issue necessary Orders in this regard.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to the Prl. Secretary to Government, Education (S.E) Department, A.P.

Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Copy to the Commissioner and Director of School Education, Near Telephone

Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad.
Appendix XXVI

Lr. No. 11/OMC/I&CAD/A1/2001, dated 11.03.2004
From
J.M.Girglani, IAS.,(Retd.)
One Man Commission
„K‟- Block, Room No. 320,
Hyderabad.
To
The Secretary to Government (SPF),
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Violation of Six Point Formula – “Transfer through OD
device” to circumvent Presidential Order – Issue of instructions - Reg.
Ref: OMC (SPF) Proceedings No.11/OMC/I&CAD/A1/2001, dated

21-05-2003.
***
It has come to the notice of this Commission that in Irrigation Department

and some other Departments, the device of “Other Duty” has been used as a
substitute for transfers and deputations. Employees sent “on other duty”
continue on other duty in the organizations where they were sent without any
particular post available for them. This has been done to provide the employee a
device to circumvent the procedure for inter cadre transfer under Para 5 (2) of
the Presidential Order defeating the purpose of localization of cadres.
An Employee may be sent on “Other Duty” only for a very short period for
a specific purpose, normally in the case of a contingency or an administrative
exigency. He goes on other duty to one particular post but only to perform
duties for a given period. His salary is drawn in his original post and there is no
lien or any such thing involved. It is neither a transfer nor a deputation nor is it
an appointment as an Officer on Special Duty. It is just a working arrangement.
It should not affect the person‟s own service and position or any other persons
services & positions in any respect. His services belong to his original post. He
has no right to seniority or promotion in a post where he works on OD. The OD
cannot be used as a camouflage for transfer. His promotion in the post where he
is on OD is invalid.
This Commission has gone into this aspect in depth, conducted meetings
with the Officials of Secretariat Departments and Heads of Departments and
issued Proceedings on the petitions received from certain individuals and Unions.
Copies of the Proceedings issued by this Commission in this regard which have
already been marked to the GAD and the concerned Departments are enclosed
herewith.
I request you to kindly issue instructions to all the Departments to put an

end to this practice involving gross violation of the Presidential Order and of
service rules in general and also to direct the Departments to take suitable
action to send back all such employees brought through “OD” device to their
respective posts. Such consequential vacancies, may be filled as per rules, with
local candidates with retrospective benefits to those deprived of seniority
promotion etc. due to those candidates who occupied these posts on “Other
Duty”.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to:
The Principal Secretary to Govt.
I&CAD Department (Irrg. Wing)
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Appendix XXVII

Lr. No.11/OMC/PRE-B.2/2003, dated 07.05.2004
From
J.M.GIRGLANI,IAS.,(Retd.),
One Man Commission (SPF),
Room No.320, „K‟ –Block,
Hyderabad.
To
General Administration (Ser.) Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC – SPF – Transfer of Work Inspectors in Panchyat Raj

Engineering Department form other Zones to Zone VI – Proceedings
– Issued.
Ref: 1. Representation from the President A.P. Diploma Engineers

Association dated 03-07-2003.
2. From the Engineer-in-Chief (PRED) Lr.No.SIV-FFWP/13163/03,
dated 21-02-04 and 17-03-04.
* * *
The President of the A.P Diploma Engineers Association represented that
five Work Inspectors viz., (1) Smt. K. Durga Rani (2) Smt. S. Padmaja (3) Smt.
Uma Padma (4)Sri. T. Ravi Kumar and (5)Sri. Ch. Adinarayana were transferred
from other Zones to Zone VI in violation of the SPF and now they are claiming
promotions to the posts of A.Es depriving the Zone VI cadres.
The issue has been examined by the Commission in consultation with the
P.R. Department, and the Engineer-in-Chief (PRED).The (i/c) Engineer-in-Chief
(PRED) and Ex-Officio Joint Secretary to Government PR & RD Department
categorically reported that the transfers effected in respect of these Work
Inspectors from other Zones to Zone VI has no sanction of the Government
which is a serious violation of Presidential Order and against all the existing
instructions of the Government.
Workcharged employees in the regular departments came under the

provisions of the Presidential Order from the day Presidential Order came into
effect from 18-10-1975. But the departments, though quite aware of this
position, did not apply these provisions. They do not seem to have made the
appointments/ initial allotments of these employees under Para (4) of the
Presidential Order nor fitted them into local cadres. Since the information given
is only about where they are originally appointed or posted but whether they are
actually locals of those zones is not known and requires verification. The
Department did not also apply Paras 6 and 7 of the Presidential Order to
determine their local status before absorbing them into regular service. Thus
they were treated as if they did not come under the purview of the Presidential
Order. Appointment by redeployment or absorption of the workcharged
employees and other surplus employees falls under direct recruitment provisions
of Paras 6 and 7 of the Presidential Order. In fact Workcharged employees fall
under Presidential Order ab initio too.
These Workcharged employees have not only been appointed in disregard

of the Presidential Order and continue to be treated as outside the Presidential
Order, but are being transferred from anywhere to any where regardless of their
local status. This results in the seniorities of the other Workcharged employees
being adversely affected apart from the violation of the Presidential Order
already inherent in the system, being further compounded.
In the circumstances this Commission held that the transfers of these five
Work Inspectors are in violation of the Presidential Order and hence they are to
be repatriated to the Zones in which they are locals.
I further request to look into this aspect wherein the Presidential Order
has been ignored totally since the beginning. Hence this Commission suggests
that:
(i) Government may consider the desirability of issuing

immediate orders that all absorptions/ redeployments,
regularization, transfers etc., of the Workcharged

Establishment should be strictly done on the basis of Paras
6 and 7 of the Presidential Order and other Government
Instructions in vogue for all posts coming under Presidential
Order, e.g. transfers under Para 5(2) of Presidential Order.
(ii) The non-locals absorbed already may be repatriated to their

local areas (district/zone as the case may be) and in the
consequential vacancies, local surplus candidates should be
absorbed.
(iii) Until Workcharged employees are posted in the Zones in
which they are locals under the Presidential Order, no
transfers should be affected.
This position applies in principle to all surplus staff .
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to: The Secretary (Finance), A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad.

Copy to: The Prl. Secretary to Government, Panchayati Raj & Rural
Development Department, A.P Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Copy to: The Engineer-in-Chief, Panchayati Raj Engineering Department,
Errammanzil, Hyderabad.
Appendix XXVIII
Lr.No.02/OMC/QNR/A2/2001-20, dated 29.04.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
The A.P.C. & Prl. Secretary to Government,
Agri. & Coop. (Horti.) Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.

General Admn. (SPF) Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Horticulture Department – Posts of Horticulture Officers
and Assistant Director of Horticulture – Regarding.
Ref: From the Commissioner and Director of Horticulture, Hyderabad
Lr.No.Estt.I-568/2001, dt. 22-01-2004 addressed to the OMC and
copy marked to the Department.
* * *
The Commissioner & Director of Horticulture reported that, the Horticulture
Department, on bifurcation from the Department of Agriculture, came into
existence on 01-01-82 and no posts were made gazetted in the Department of
Horticulture after 18-10-1975. As per A.P. Horticulture Service Rules, the post of
Horticulture Officer is the first level Gazetted and Zonal cadre post and the post
of Asst. Director of Horticulture is second level Gazetted and a State cadre post.
The post of Asst. Director of Horticulture is being filled up by promotion from the
category of Horticulture Officers on State-wide basis. However, the Department
has suggested that the post of Horticulture Officer also may be made a State
cadre post.
The post of Horticulture Officer is originally the post of the Assistant

Agriculture Officer redesignated as Agriculture Officer which is called as
Horticulture Officer in Horticulture Department on bifurcation of Agriculture
Department. The post of A.A.O. is included in Specified Gazetted Category (Third
Schedule Sl.No.3-A) and the post has also been categorized along with the posts
of Tahsildar, Assistant Executive Engineer, Inspector of Police and Motor Vehicle
Inspector for 60% reservation under Para 8 (3) of the Presidential Order.
Hence, the post of Horticulture Officer should also „ifso facto‟ be similarly
brought under the 60% reservation along with the posts specified in Para 8 (3)
of the Presidential Order, retrospectively with effect from the date of its
designation as A.H.O. Otherwise its description in the Service Rules as a Zonal
post would be legally in contravention of the Presidential Order. To validate this,
retrospective inclusion in the Third Schedule of Presidential Order is suggested.
The following course of action may be taken:-
a) Obtaining the orders of Government of India for the inclusion of the

post of Horticulture Officer in Specified Gazetted Category (Third
schedule) with retrospective effect.
b) Obtaining orders of Government of India for extending 60% reservation

to the post of Horticulture Officer under Para 8 (3) of the Presidential
Order with retrospective effect to validate what the Department is
already following.
Department of Horticulture may also be informed to continue the post of

Assistant Director of Horticulture as a State cadre post since the Six Point
Formula contemplates, in any Department one Gazetted post to be under the
Third Schedule. Since in Horticulture Department the post of Horticulture Officer,
the first Gazetted post, is being proposed for inclusion in the Third Schedule, the
next Gazetted post can remain a State-wide post.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to : The Commissioner & Director of Horticulture, A.P., Hyderabad.

Appendix XXIX

Lr.No.06/86/OMC/A1/2002-3, dated 05.05.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
General Administration (Services & SPF) Department,
Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC - SPF – Posts Gazetted after Presidential Order – Further
clarification – Reg.
Ref:1.OMC (SPF) Lr.No..06/86/OMC/A.1/2002-1, dt.01-11-2002.
2.OMC (SPF) D.O.Lr.No.06/86/OMC/A1/2002-2, dated 21-05-2003.
***
Kindly refer to the correspondence cited. Some posts that were non-
gazetted on 18-10-75 and were gazetted thereafter, Continue to be treated as
zonal posts and also with reservation of 70% in direct recruitment without any
orders from Government of India. In principle, this is in conformity with the
Commision‟s basic view regarding immutability of the original character of a post
after passing of the Presidential Order. But this principle has to be given effect
only through proper legal action after obtaining Government of India‟s Orders
under the Presidential Order. Where it is done without the legal course of action,
however desirable, the action has been all along invalid. After gazetting, the
post becomes a State level post under the Presidential Order and also loses its
reservation for locals.
Therefore, proper course of action has to be laid down for the posts that
are gazetted after 18-10-75. The following course of action is suggested to
legally operationalise the suggestion already made in our reference cited:-
a) Add the following as sub-para 9 under Para 8 of the Presidential

Order:-
“Reservation in favour of local candidates in the matter of direct

recruitment in terms of Para 8 Sub-para 2 and their local area
(Zone/multi Zone, as the case may be ) shall remain unchanged
even after any of the Non-gazetted post is made gazetted. This

provision shall be valid with effect from 18-10-1975 i.e. the date
of promulgation of the Presidential Order.”
(This action has been already initiated in your Office)
b) In sub para (j) of Para 2 (1) of the Presidential Order after the
words “Central Government” the following Proviso shall be added
:-
“Provided that all the posts that have been gazetted after 18-10-
1975 from among the non-gazetted posts, shall be deemed to be
included under the Third Schedule of the Presidential Order with
effect from the date of gazetting”.
(This has to be added to your proposal in the Office file)
c) All the posts Gazetted after 18-10-1975 should be removed from

the Sub-ordinate Service Rules and separate Service Rules for
each such post should be made. This action is to be taken
administratively by the Departments in consultation with General
Administration (Services) Department.
The earlier suggestions are modified to this extent since this course of
action takes care of the legal validity regarding the description of certain posts,
gazetted after the Presidential Order, as zonal posts in the respective Service
Rules and also retrospectively validate what some Departments are already
following with reference to such posts. It also ensures the immutability of the
character of all such posts „en bloc‟ instead of the time consuming procedure of
seeking the orders of Government of India in each of those individual cases.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Appendix XXX
Lr.No.06/59/OMC/B1/2001, dated 25.02.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
General Administration (SPF) Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.(w.e)
Sir,
Sub: One Man Commission (SPF) – Representation received with regard to
certain irregular appointments of Junior Lecturers in Zone-VI, with
non-local candidates in the year 1997, by the A.P. College Service
Commission – Report called for -Regarding.
Ref: 1. Representation from Sri V. Shankaraiah, Nizamabad District, dated

18-08-2001.
2. From the Secretary to Govt., Higher Education (IE-I.1)
Department Lr.No.12532/IE-1/2001-3,dt. 06.12.2001.
3. OMC (SPF) Lr.No.06/59/OMC/B1/2001, dt.26.07.2003 addressed
to the A.P. Public Service Commission and Copy marked to the
Prl. Secretary to Govt., Education Department.
* * *
I invite your attention to the references cited (copies enclosed).
In the report of Higher Education Department (the reference 2nd cited), it

has been brought out that the College Service Commission interpreted, in its
recruitment of 1997, “40%” to be purely a “non-local quota”, not an open merit
quota, which is in contravention of Para 8 of the Presidential Order as amplified
in G.O.P.No.763, General Administration (SPF-A) Department dated 15-11-1975
and its Annexures I & II. It came to light in the Meetings held by this
Commission with the A.P. Public Service Commission that the A.P. Public Service
Commission in its recruitments also followed 40% quota to non-locals and no
locals have figured at all in those vacancies, while the Presidential Order
envisaged that the merit quota should include both locals and non-locals.
The posts of Junior Lecturers were created as gazetted posts to replace

the non-gazetted Tutors and Demonstrators in the Junior Colleges in the Higher
Education Department. The recruitment to these posts was made by the College
Service Commission treating them as “zonal posts” on the basis of their
previous position under the Presidential Order when they were non-gazetted.
The College Service Commission also gave 60% preference for locals in direct
recruitment of Junior Lecturers adopting the reservation percentage for locals
that appears in sub Para (3) of Para 8 of the Presidential Order, which applies
only to the five specific gazetted posts viz., the Tahsildars, AEEs, Assistant
Agricultural Officers, Inspector of Police and Motor Vehicle Inspectors, mentioned
therein. Hence the action of the A.P. College Service Commission was an error
because gazetted posts become State-wide posts unless they are included in the
Third Schedule to the Presidential Order under Government of India‟s orders.
Even such inclusion does not bring any preference percentage to locals. In this
case it was obviously an error on the part of the College Service Commission,
which happened to bring undue reservation of 60% to the local candidates and a
40% reservation to non-locals. This rather gross error, has been perpetuated by
the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission also as successors to the College
Service Commission, as informed by the APPSC Officials in the Meetings held by
this Commission. It is not known whether the position led to any litigation. The
A.P. Public Service Commission, was addressed, in the reference 3rd cited, in this
regard.
Government in the General Administration (SPF) Department may kindly

go into the matter to enquire whether the A.P. College Service Commission and
subsequently A.P. Public Service Commission have treated the 40% of the
vacancies for non-locals exclusively, which means a reservation of 40% to non-
locals, which further aggravates the error. They may kindly look into this and
take necessary action to validate the action with Government of India‟s consent.
Or, if Government feel that the matter may be as it is, they may decide
accordingly.
As for the right course of action, Government of India‟s orders may be

obtained by the Government in General Administration (SPF) Department :-
1) To treat the posts as Zonal.

2) To provide 70% preference for Local Candidates – in order to ensure

that the position before Gazetting is not mutated due to Gazetting of
the post.
These orders can only be prospectively applicable when issued.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Appendix XXXI

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (S.P.F.-A) DEPARTMENT
U.O.NOTE No. 170647/SPF-A/2003 Dated:31-12-2003.
Sub:- Interpretation of Sub-para (VI) of Para 2 of

G.O.Rt.No.1410 Education (Services–VI–2) Department, Dated 28-
11-2003 on Inter District transfer of Teachers – Reg.
Ref:- (1) G.O.Rt.No.1410 Education (Services-VI-2) Department Dated

28-11-2003.
(2) D.O.Lr.No.OMC (SPF)/Pesi/2003 of Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS (Retd.)
OMC (SPF) Dated 15-12-2003.
(3) D.O.Lr.No.4000/C3-2/2003, of Dr. Manmohan Singh, I.A.S.,
Commissioner and Director of School Education Dt.16-12-2003.
(4) D.O.Lr.No.11/OMC/SE/B1/2003, of Sri J.M. Girglani, IAS (Retd.)
OMC (SPF) Dated 17-12-2003.
* * *
The Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and

Regulation of Direct Recruitment) order, 1975, which is commonly called as the
Presidential Order clearly specifies that there is only 2 local cadres, as far as
organization is concerned i.e., (1) District Cadre and (2) Zonal Cadre and the
Government shall organize the different Civil posts in varied departments into
Local Cadres within a period of 27 months from the commencement of the
order. The service categories of posts in the Department with varied scale of pay
should not be confused with Local Cadre. The various categories of posts in
varied departments with different pay scales up to Lower Division clerks and
Teachers (as a special case) are organized as District Cadre and the other posts
except those exempted under Para 14 of G.O.Ms.No.674 G.A. (SPF-A)
Department dated 20-10-1975 and some specified Gazetted posts of State cadre
have been organized as Zonal posts.
The Local Cadre of Secondary Grade Teacher and School Assistant is one
and the same i.e., District. In case of counting the service in the Local Cadre the
service rendered by the individual in both the posts i.e., Secondary Grade
Teacher and School Assistant must be taken into account for the post of School
Assistant. One Man Commission (Six Point Formula) have already specified the
above fact Crystal clear.
I order to ensure uniformity of approach with regard to clarification on

Local Cadre school Education Department are requested not to confuse the Local
Cadre of the post with the Service cadre of the posts carrying varied pay scales
and also requested to provide extra time to enable the applicants, who have
spent two years in a particular district to apply for inter-district transfer,
regardless of the post or number of posts hold during the specified period of two
(2) years.
B. ARAVINDA REDDY
To
The School Education Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Copy to: P.S. to O.M.C. (SPF) A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad.
//FORWARDED::BY ORDER//
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
Appendix XXXII


Ph:(O) 040-23452663
Tele Fax: 040-23452663
D.O.Lr.No.OMC(SPF)/Peshi/2003, Dated: 15-12-2003
Dear Dr. Manmohan Singh,
Sub: Interpretation of sub-para (vi) of para 2 of G.O.Rt.No.1410,

Education (Services VI-2) Dept., Dt.28.11.2003 on Inter
District transfer of Teachers.
* * *
It has been represented to me that your department is interpreting two years

service in the local cadre as two years service in the same post i.e. either as
School Assistant or Secondary Grade Teacher as the case may be. But I wish to
clarify that a “local cadre” is different from the service classes and categories.
Secondary Grade “Teacher and School Assistant constitute different categories in
different classes under the service rules. They do not belong to different
“cadres”. The reference to “local cadre” in sub-para (vi) mentioned above is the
local area of a district in which various posts of various departments put
together constitute the “local care”. The intention is that a person applying for a
transfer from a particular “local cadre” (which means a particular district) should
have spent at least two years in that “local cadre” or in that district and not in
any particular post. Local cadre has nothing to do with the posts. It has
reference only to what is called in the Presidential Order as “local area”. There
are only two “local cadres” under the Presidential Order: 1). District Local cadre
and 2). Zonal Local Cadre. Hence two years in a “local cadre” means two years
in a particular district regardless of the types of posts held during that period in
as far as teachers and LDC level posts are concerned. Since today is the last day
for applying for transfers I request you to kindly rectify the interpretation in the
computer to enable the applicants who have spent two years in a particular
district to apply regardless of the post or number of posts held during this
period. Otherwise they will suffer irreparable unwarranted jeopardy.
With regards,
Yours sincerely,
Sd/
(J.M.GIRGLANI)
Dr.MANMOHAN SINGH, IAS

Commissioner & Director
O/o. Director of School Education
Hyderabad
Copy to Principal Secretary to Government, Education (S.E) Department

Copy to Secretary to Government, G.A.(SPF) Department
Appendix XXXIII

Lr.No.11/OMC/Nizamabad/6/2003, dt:07-05-2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
The Secretary to Govt.,
General Administration (Ser.) Dept.,
A.P Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – New Organisations coming under the Presidential
Order for the first time - Organisation of Local Cadres – Clarification –
Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from Dr. P. Jayaram, Lecturer in Microbiology,

Government Degree College, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District,
dt 20.07.2001
2. Letter from the Director of Collegiate Education, Hyderabad
Rc.No.1435/Services-IV/1/2001, dt 18.02.2002.
3. OMC(SPF) Lr.No.11/OMC/Nizamabad/6/2001, Dt.10-4-02.
* * *
A representation has been received from a Lecturer of an Aided College
which has been taken over by the Government for a transfer to a Zone where he
is a local.
This is a case of an institution, an Aided Degree College taken over by the
Government, coming under the Government for the first time long after the
passing of the Presidential Order. It is something like opening a new
government office or department. When such a thing happens, for that new
organization which comes under the Presidential Order for the first time, the
exercise to be undertaken is the same as was done from 18-10-1975 onwards
for the first time for the entire government and local bodies viz., to bring this
new organization under the system of local cadres both district and zonal
existing within the department under the approved localization scheme of the
Department. The existing staff of the institution would then be taken up for
initial allotment in the same way as was done when Presidential Order was first
brought into force applying the provisions of Para 4 (4) of the Presidential Order
which are applied for initial allotments. If this exercise is done, some of the staff
may be sent to their local districts and local zones respectively and in their place
some staff would be brought from other zones and districts but would be local
for this organization. This exercise was not done. The Director, Collegiate
Education has already been advised to undertake this exercise and bring this
organization under the Presidential Order by necessary reallotments and
consequent transfers.
There will be a number of such cases in the Education Department itself

and in some other Departments. Hence, the Commission requests the Govt. to
kindly issue general instructions for a strict adoptation of the procedure laid
down under Para 4 (2) of the Presidential Order and subsequently treat the
Institution like any other Government Organisation under the Presidential Order.
Necessary transfers may be effected after the action under Para 4 (3) is taken,
to bring in local candidates.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to the Prl. Secretary to Government, Education (HE) Department.

A.P., Secretariat.
Copy to the Director, Collegiate Education, Lata Talkies, Nampally,

A.P., Hyderabad.
Appendix XXXIV

Lr. No. 11/OMC/B1/ANTPR/2003, dated 07.05.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub:- OMC - SPF – Post of Deputy Tahsildar ( Civil Supplies) – Certain
clarification – Reg.
Ref:- 1. Representation of Sri R. V. Satyanarayana, Deputy Tahsildar (Civil

Supplies), O/o. District Supply Officer, Collectorate, Anantapur
District, dated 21.06.2003.
2. From the Commissioner, Civil Supplies, CCS Ref. No.
Admn.1(1)/677/2004, dated 28.02.2004.
* * *
It came to the notice of the Commission through an individual
representation that Promotions to the post of Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildars
are taking place from among the Senior Assistants of two excluded organizations
of the Presidential Order viz., Office of the Commissioner of Civil Supplies i.e.
the Head of Department excluded under Para 14 (b) and Chief Rationing Office,
Special Office notified under G.S.R. 526 (E) issued under clause (i) sub para (1)
of Para 2 of Presidential Order. According to the report of the Civil Supplies
Department 25% of posts are earmarked for Civil Supplies personnel in the
districts in Non-Gazetted cadres like Jr. Assistants/ Typists/ Sr. Assistants/
Deputy Tahsildars. The rest of the 75% posts being manned by the Revenue
Department. To fill up the 25% of Deputy Tahsildars (Civil Supplies) posts, in
the Districts, qualified Sr. Assistants from the O/o. Commissioner of Civil
Supplies, Hyderabad and O/o. Chief Rationing Officer, Hyderabad were promoted
to the posts of Deputy Tahsildar (Civil Supplies) under 25% quota and sent to
the Districts, as per the orders issued in Government Memo. No.690/CS.II/79-
12, F&A (CS.II) Department dated 02.04.1980 permitting the Commissioner,
Civil Supplies to make temporary appointments/ Promotions to the cadre of
Deputy Tahsildar (Civil Supplies) pending approval of rules. Deputy Tahsildar,
Civil Supplies posts are not included in the Group-II Services Recruitment of
APPSC. All treated as promotion posts.
These postings though on promotion are made as “appointment by

transfer” from excluded organizations to Zones and are governed by Para 5 (2)
(a) of the Presidential Order which requires that these can be done only if there
is a provision in the rules. This is amplified in Para 10 of G.O.P. 728, dated
01.11.75, G.A. (SPF) Department. In the absence of the Rules one would not
know how to justify these appointments by transfer.
This position is further complicated by the fact that all appointments by

transfer which are really in the nature of promotions have been held by the
Supreme Court to be violative of the Presidential Order as they are not covered
by Para 5(2) of the Presidential Order. This is a general problem which the
Government is ceased of to find a solution. In case the appointment by transfers
of Deputy Tahsildars (Civil Supplies) is hit by the Supreme Court Judgement, the
general solution that may be found may be applied to Civil Supplies Department
also.
The Rules of the Civil Supplies Department seem to be getting referred

back and forth between the department and Government for years, but not
getting finalized. Even the One Man Commission of Sri Sundaresan, IAS (Retd.)
had given its recommendations about 13 years ago. For the time being some
G.Os have been serving the purpose of rules.
The Service Rules of Civil Supplies Department may be finalized in terms

of Sundaresan Committee report at the earliest to validate the promotions of
these Deputy Tahsildars (Civil Supplies) retrospectively and to be applied
prospectively, subject to whether general steps are contemplated to meet the
situation created by Supreme Court judgment mentioned above.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to the Ex-Officio Secretary to Government, Food,

Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Department
and Commissioner, Civil Supplies Department, Hyderabad.
Copy to the Commissioner, Civil Supplies, “Civil Supplies Bhavan”,

Somajiguda, Hyderabad.
Appendix XXXV

ABSTRACT
Order, 1975 – Monitoring Cell on implementation of G.O.Ms.No.610, General
Administration (SPF-A) Department, dated 30-12-1985 headed by the Secretary
to Government (Services), General Administration Department – Constituted –
Order – Issued.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G.O.Rt.No.233 Dated:8-8-2003.
Read the following:

dt. 30-12-1985.
***
ORDER:
Government have issued orders in the reference 1st read above to set right
the violations of the provisions of the Presidential Order brought before it. In the
reference 2nd read above, Government have issued orders to constitute a “One
Man Commission” to receive representations from Associations, Unions and
individuals in cases where injustice was done in implementation of
G.O.Ms.No.610 and to sort out the anomalies. The Commission submitted its
preliminary report in October, 2001. Its final report is awaited. A House
Committee was constituted in February, 2002 to go into the implementation of
G.O.610 and to suggest necessary corrective measures. The Committee
submitted its Interim report to A.P. Leg. Assembly on 17.3.2003 and the
Government have already taken action on both the reports.
2. The Government felt that it necessary to continuously monitor the

implementation of assurances given in G.O.610 and also the provisions of the
Presidential Order in order to ensure that proper representation of local
candidates is maintained in Government services.
3. To Continuously monitor implementation of G.O.610 and the provisions of

Presidential Order, Government hereby constitute a Monitoring Cell headed by
the Secretary to Government (Services), General Administration Department.
4. The Monitoring Cell will be provided with One Section Officer, two Assistant
Section Officers and one Attender out of the staff working in General
Administration Department. Additional responsibility of inspection work based on
petitions and complaints shall be entrusted to one of the Inspecting Officers

working in General Administration (Official Language) Department.
5. All Departments of Secretariat shall provide the required information and

material to the Monitoring Cell as and when required.
MOHAN KANDA
CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
To
Sri B. Aravinda Reddy, IAS.,
Secretary to Government (Services)
General Administration (SPF) Department
Copy to:
All Departments of Secretariat
All Heads of Departments
All District Collectors
The G.A. (OP.I/II/III/IV/SB/Claims A/C/Spl.A/Spl.B) Department
The Commissioner, Printing Press, Hyderabad
The I&PR, Publicity Cell, Hyderabad
The P.S to Prl. Secretary to C.M.
The P.S to C.S
The P.S. to One Man Commission (SPF), Secretariat, Hyderabad
The Secretary, A.P. Public Service Commission
All Recognised Associations
ST/SC
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
Appendix XXXVI
Confidential
Lr.No.06/89/OMC/A1/2003, dated 15.07.2004
From
2nd Floor,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
To
G.A. (SPF) Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: Major Development Projects – Implementation of Presidential Order
in the Projects – Regarding.
* * *
Major Development Projects are entities different and distinct from

departments. These are listed out in G.S.R. 525 (E), issued in pursuance of
clause (g) of sub paragraph (1) of paragraph 2 of the Presidential Order.
Obviously therefore the offices of the Heads or Chief Engineers/Engineers-in-
Chief of these projects cannot be, and are not, Heads of Departments as they
are Heads of Projects. These were never intended to be excluded under para 14
(b) of the Presidential Order.
2. In 1985 when Presidential Order was applied to the Projects through

G.O.Ms.No. 455 General Administration (SPF-A) Department, dated 03-10-1985
amending para 14(e) of the Presidential Order, these offices had to come under
the localisation scheme which should have been submitted to the Government
and local cadres should have been formed in these offices, in terms of guidelines
laid down in para 9 (A) of G.O.P.No.728. This was not done, though in an ad
hoc way localization was applied to the Project field offices except to their Head
Offices. Not doing so has been and continues to be a glaring violation of the
Presidential Order.
3. Engineer-in-Chief, Irrigation & C.A.D has informed that the non-locals from
the offices of the Heads of Projects were not repatriated after 1985 when the
Presidential Order was applied, because they are in the offices of the Heads of
Departments (treating the Project Heads as Heads of Departments). Treating
Heads of Projects as Heads of Departments also has been and continues to be a
patent contravention of the Presidential Order.
4. The savings Para-14 of Presidential Order excludes under item (e) Any
post other than a post belonging to any of the non-gazetted categories in the
Ministerial and Technical Services in a Major Development Project. This provision
was inserted as an amendment to item „e‟ of Para 14 by G.O.Ms.No. 455 General
Administration (SPF.A) Department, dated 03.10.1985. Before this G.O. Major
Projects were totally excluded from the Presidential Order. Initially the simple
entry under item „e‟ just read “Major Development Projects”. That entry totally
excluded them, like the other items under Para 14 from the purview of the
Presidential Order. “Major Projects” were listed under GSR 525 (E).
5. It was in pursuance of Para-5 (2) of G.O.Ms.No.610 General

Administration (SPF-A) Department, dated 30-12-1985 and G.O.Ms.No.564
General Administration (SPF-A) Department, dated 05-12-1985 that the 33
Major Development Projects of Para 14 (e), notified under G.S.R.525 (E), were
brought under the purview of the Presidential Order, but these were not brought
fully under the Presidential Order. There was also a promise in both the G.O.s
mentioned hereinabove, for extending the Presidential Order to these Projects
with retrospective effect from 1983, but that was not to be. Some of the posts
like those of AEEs & DEEs remained excluded from Presidential Order albeit the
commitment under the two G.Os mentioned herein.
6. Unwarranted and inexplicable exclusion from the Presidential Order, of

AEEs and DEEs of the Projects listed under G.S.R. 525 (E), has become a source
for quite some deviations from the Presidential Order and a continuing cause of
grievance. Why the Specified Gazetted Categories, AEEs and DEEs of the
Departments have not been brought under the Presidential Order under the
Projects while bringing only the non-gazetted posts under it is not known. The
result of this omission has been that for these posts in the Projects, the Officers
are taken only on deputation from Departments. This implies that the status quo
that existed with regard to these posts in Para-14 (e) before its amendment
under G.O.Ms.No.455 has been continued. This is not in conformity with the
commitments of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.610 & G.O.Ms.No. 564
mentioned above in para 5.
7. The total action would have been to bring under the purview of the
Presidential Order all the posts that are covered by the Presidential Order for the
Irrigation and CAD Department and other Engineering Departments, which
would include the Specified Gazetted Categories of AEEs and DEEs also. As it
was not done the Projects have become a free hunting ground for posting AEEs
and DEEs on deputation from anywhere.
8. Another aspect of the issue is that the posts of AEEs and DEEs that have,
from time to time, ceased to be utilised for Project works are being treated as
Projects posts. But the right position would be that, from the actual time when
they ceased to be used for Project works, ever since they have been diverted de
facto, on ground, to regular departmental work and for maintenance work, from
that time onwards they ceased to fall under the purview of item (e) of Para 14 of
the Presidential Order and ceased to be excluded from the purview of the
Presidential Order. In fact, most of the Major Development Projects have also
been completed long ago but continue to be in the list under G.S.R.No.525 (E).
It is irrelevant, whether such Projects have not been formally notified as
completed, for various technical or financial considerations. The rationale is that,
when any post ceases to be utilised for the Project work and is utilised on
department‟s functions and for maintenance, it cannot be treated as a Project
post, and granted exemption under item (e) of Para 14 of the Presidential Order.
But the practice is to make use of the name of the Project and use them on Non-
Project work as the Project work is long completed. Thus any one gets
deputation from any Zone to the detriment of the local candidate.
9. The Presidential Order applies to posts and not to material or works. If

there is no project work there cannot be Project posts. They become „ipso facto‟
departmental or Non-Project posts. In this context, the glaring examples are of
the Irrigation Projects like Nagarjuna Sagar Project, Godavari Barrage Project,
Vamsadhara Project, Srisailam Project, etc. Similarly Manjira Water Supply
Scheme Second Phase, Remodelling of Water Distribution System in the Twin
Cities (of Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board) are also
completed Projects. Instead of bringing their AEEs and DEEs under local cadres,
those posts have been wrongly treated as Project posts even after the dates
from which those posts ceased to be used for actual Project works. Due to this
incorrect action, non-locals from other zones have been regularly and improperly
posted and are being posted on deputation,
depriving the local candidates of their rightful opportunities of appointment by

direct recruitment, zonal seniorities and promotions to such posts in their
respective local zones and consequential concomitant benefits.
10. Purely as a logical step, which may not necessarily be the best option in
pragmatic terms, an order may be got issued by the Government of India
deleting item (e) of Para 14 of the Presidential Order and the entire G.S.R. 525
(E) with effect from 01-01-1986. The commitments for inclusion of AEEs‟ posts
in the Presidential Order were made on 05-12-1985 (G.O.Ms.No.564) and 30-
12-1985 (G.O.Ms.No.610). Hence, this date. DEEs‟ inclusion is concomitant to
the inclusion of AEEs, as these are promotion posts placed in the Third Schedule.
So, on par with the departmental posts of AEEs, the Project posts of AEEs would
have to be put in a common zonal seniority for promotion to the posts of DEEs.
So, the only way to make good the omission and bring these posts under the
Presidential Order with effect from the last date of commitment in G.O.Ms.No.
610 is, to amend Para 14 of the Presidential Order to completely delete item (e)
with effect from 01-01-1986 and as a concomitant action, delete G.S.R. 525 (E).
This measure will also stop the misuse of the posts in the completed works, in
Project Head Offices and on going Project works which are now being used for
bringing in non-locals on deputations in the name of Projects.
11. Retrospective effect to the consequential action, arising out of the

deletions proposed above, would adversely affect vested rights and interests of
those who were appointed/promoted validly under the then existing dispensation
that was allowed to continue despite the commitments in the two G.O.s
mentioned above. The resultant contentions and litigations in this regard may be
taken into consideration if the retrospective deletions are effected. The hassle-
less course would seem to be to make deletion of item (e) of para 14 and GSR
525 (E) prospectively, but with immediate effect, though it would be against the
logical course of action as mentioned in para 10 above.
12. The Hobson‟s choice before the Government and the employees
associations is between the logical remedial action of para 10 which is fraught
with unending litigations and stay orders, or the pragmatic hassle-less course
mentioned above in para 11.
13. The Commission did not write to the Government earlier as it thought that
inclusion of the issue in the report would lead to necessary action. But since the
Report is delayed and meanwhile incorrect action continues and is getting
protected under stay orders of APAT (as in Public Health Engineering
Department), the Commission feels that action could be taken by the
Government without waiting for the Commission‟s Report.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(J.M. GIRGLANI)
Appendix XXXVII

Lr.No.11/OMC/LET&F/LO(Enf.)/B1/2004, dated 01.09.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
The President,
Telangana Employees Association,
C-62, „B‟ Blocks,
Malakpet,
Hyderabad – 500 035.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Gazetted Officers – Labour Department – Labour Officer
(Enforcment) in Head Office, retiring on 31.07.2004 A.N. – Filling up
of the post by another Officer contrary to the G.O.Ms.No.610 –
Hearing on 25.08.2004 at 3.00 p.m. – Reg.
Ref: Your representation dated 22.07.2004.
* * *
With reference to your representation cited, and inform you that
representatives of the Association and the officials of the Department of
Commissioner of Labour were heard on 25.08.2004.
The post of Labour Officer was made multi-zonal post under

G.O.Ms.No.348, GA (SPF) Dept., dt: 11.05.1977 with the concurrence of the
Government of India. It has remained as such under G.O.Ms.No.34, GA (SPF)
Dept., dt: 24.01.1981 (mentioned in III rd Schedule). The post was included in
the Third Schedule, hence, it continued to remain as a multi-zonal post. Hence,
on legal grounds there is no cause for any change in the position of the Labour
Officer. Therefore I hold that the impugned G.O.Ms.No.71, WDCW & Labour
(Lab.IV) Dept., dt: 08.06.1993 is quite within the provisions of the Presidential
Order.
With regard to the Labour Officer posts in the Head of Department office,
since there are only three posts of Labour Officers, even if the fair-share
principle is applied as per Para-9 and 11 of GOP 728, each multi-zone will get
only one post. Therefore, there can
be no objection to the present practice of taking one Labour Officer from each
multi-zone for HOD office.
This is for your information.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to the Commissioner of Labour, Tanguturi Anjaiah Bhavan,

Charminar „X‟ Roads, Hyderabad.
Copy to the Prl. Secretary to Government, LET&F Dept.,
Copy to the Secretary to Government, G.A (Services) Dept.,
Appendix XXXVIII
Lr.No.11/OMC/B2/WDHCP/2003, dated 16.09.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
WD, CW & DW Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: One Man Commission (SPF) – Women Development, Child Welfare
and Disbled Welfare Department – Representation from Sri O.
Ramulu and others, dated Nil for implementation of G.O.Ms.No.610 –
Regarding.
Ref: 1. Representation from O. Ramulu & others, dated Nil.

2. G.O.Ms.No.1, WD, CW & L Department, dt.06.01.1988.
3. G.O.Ms.No.36, WD & CD (WH.Desk) Department, dated
08.07.1996.
4. From Commissioner, DW & SC, Lr.No.S-IV/1945/2003, dated
20.08.2004.
* * *
I invite your attention to the references cited.
In the representation 1st cited Sri O. Ramulu & others working in

Government School for Hearing Handicapped and Visually Handicapped have
represented to implement the G.O.Ms.No.610 in Teaching Staff working in
Government Blind Residential Schools. The service conditions are applied on par
with the other Teachers working in other Schools, whereas, the recruitment and
transfer of Teachers working in Disabled Welfare Department are taken up on
State-Wide basis.
In the references 2nd & 3rd cited Government in WD,CW Department have
issued orders declaring the three Schools as State Level Institutions. But the
G.O. does not show whether Government of India consent was obtained through
GAD (SPF) concurrence is maintained. Therefore you are requested to verify
from GA (SPF) Department if Government of India consent was issued. If not it

has to be obtained the Institution has to be notified under GSR 527(E) and
added in the existing list in the Government of India consent till that is done, we
may not disturb the existing system being followed.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to the Commissioner, DW & SC, Nampally, Hyderabad.

Appendix XXXIX
Minutes of Meeting held on 09-09-2004 with the Commissioner,

Juvenile Welfare, Correctional Services and Welfare of Street Children
Department and WD, CW & DW Department,
I) The following Officers attended the Meeting: -
1. Sri K. Sreeramulu, Joint Director of Correctional Services, O/o. the

Commissioner, Juvenile Welfare, Correctional Services and Welfare
of Street Children Department.
2. Sri S.S. Sastry, Asst. Secretary to Government, WD, CW & DW

II) The following information has been given at the time of Meeting:-
1. Composition of staff in HODs.

2. Information regarding posts gazetted after 18.10.75 in proforma 1,
1A, 1B and 1C.
3. Information in Table No.13, Locals and Non-Locals status of
workcharged employees.
4. Information in Table No.14, Locals and Non-Locals status of
employees working on deputation.
5. Information in Table No.16, Locals and Non-Locals status of staff of
staff working on the State Level Institutions.
III) The following information is still due: -
Information on item no.6 of OMC‟s Booklet i.e. appointments in rule

10(A)(1).
IV) The minutes of the meeting held on 17.10.2002 with the WD, CW & DW
Department, Secretariat and the HOD as confirmed by the HOD 0n
17.03.2003 was discussed in the meeting and the Commission observed
that on the multi zonal posts who is a local candidate for any post which
are of the normal zonal nature i.e. above LDC Cadre. In this case the
District Probation Officer Grade-II and its equivalent post should be filled
by the local candidate of the zone in which the vacancy arises or can he
be a local candidate of the entire multi-zone.
The Commission has suggested the Department to send proposals to the

Government with a request to obtain the Government of India‟s orders for multi-
zonal posts.
IV) The Commission further observed that in GSR No.529(E) under the
schedule at page no. 42-43 of guide lines and instructions for
implementation of Presidential Order –
Sl.No.6 “all categories of executive posts in jail wing and all categories
ministerial posts above lower division clerk - the Department listed under
“Jail Department”.
The Commission suggested the Department to send necessary proposals

to Government to enter the “Juvenile Welfare, Correctional Services and
Welfare of Street Children” after Sl.No.6 “to the entry of the Department” under
529(E).
The Joint Director of Correctional Services, O/o. the Commissioner,

Juvenile Welfare, Correctional Services and Welfare of Street Children
Department has promised to send the information due to the Commission and
necessary proposals to Government shortly.
Sd/-
(J.M.GIRGLANI)
Appendix XXXX
MINUTES OF THE MEETING WITH THE DIRECTOR OF YOUTH SERVICES

HELD ON 16-09-2004 AT 4.00 P.M. IN THE CHAMBERS OF ONE MAN
COMMISSION (SPF)
***
Present:
Sarvasri
1. J.M.GIRGLANI, IAS(Retd.)
2. S.GOPALA KRISHNA
Superintendent
O/o Director, Youth Services
Hyderabad
Sri S.Gopala Krishna, Superintendent, O/o Director, Youth Services

informed that in the Head Office they have a Deputy Director who is a
departmental person and an Assistant Director who is on deputation. The only
departmental posts in the department seem to be Last Grade employees,
Assistants and Office Superintendents, in the Districts as well as in Head Office.
They have, therefore, no feeder channel for any gazetted posts. The District
Youth Welfare Officers are on deputation. They have adhoc rules. At this stage
we cannot have a localization scheme nor can we enforce the fair share principle
of deputation. It is quite strange that a person has reached the level of a Deputy
Director without proper feeder channel in the department. It is recommended
that the department should fill up a feeder channel or have 70% direct
recruitment to the posts of District Youth Welfare Officers prescribing
recruitment criteria suitable to the post, leaving 30% for the Non-Governmental
Organizations of the Department.
Sd/-
(J.M.GIRGLANI)
ONE MAN COMMISSION(SPF)
PROCEEDINGS
PROCEEDINGS
INDEX
No Proceedings Page Nos.
68 06/OMC/KMM/A2/2003-1, Dt.29/09/2003 103 - 104
69 06/OMC/KMM/A2/2003-2, Dt.30-09-2003 105 - 106
70 06/74/OMC/B1/2001, Dt.15/10/2003 107 - 108
71 06/60/OMC(S.P.F)/B1/2001, Dt.29/10/2003. 109
72 11/OMC/WGL-21/B1/2002, Dt.05/11/2003 110 - 111
73 11/OMC/WGL-21/B1/2002, Dt.05/11/2003. 112 - 113
74 06/51/OMC/A2/2001-3, Dt.10/11/2003 114 - 115
75 06/51/OMC/A2/2001-4, Dt.10/11/2003. 116 - 117
76 06/114/OMC/A3/2001-, Dt.13/11/2003. 118 - 119
77 11/OMC/WRL/A2/2001, Dt.20/11/2003. 120 - 121
78 11/OMC/WRL/A2/2001, Dt.20/11/2003. 122 - 123
79 11/OMC/WGL/8/A2/2001-4, Dt.27/11/2003 124 - 126
80 11/OMC/WGL/8/A2/2001-5, Dt.27/11/2003 127 - 129
81 11/OMC/WGL/8/A2/2001-6, Dt.27/11/2003 130 - 132
82 11/OMC/B1/SE/2003, Dt.12-12-2003 133 - 135
83 06/92/OMC/A1/I&C.A.D/2003-2, Dt.16/12/2003 136
84 06/89/1/OMC/B2/2001, Dt.17/12/2003 137 - 138
85 11/OMC/B1/2003/Dt.20-12-2003. 139 - 140
86 06/34/OMC/A2/2003, Dt.26/12/2003. 141 - 143
87 11/OMC/B1/I/2003, Dt.12/01/2004 144 - 145

No Proceedings Page Nos.
88 06/91/OMC/A1/2003-3, Dt.21/01/2004 146 - 147
89 11/OMC/B2/E.O/2004, Dt.21/01/2004. 148
90 06/93/OMC/A1/2003-2, Dt.31/01/2004 149
91 06/59/OMC/B1/2001, Dt.25/02/2004. 150-151
92 06/111/OMC/A1/2001, Dt.15/03/2004 152- 153
93 06/90/OMC/A1/2003, Dt.23/03/2004. 154
94 06/59/OMC/B1/2001, Dt.31/03/2004 155
95 06/65/OMC/A2/2001-11, Dt.19/04/2004. 156
96 06/89/OMC/S.P.F/B2/2001, Dt.06/05/2004 157 - 158
97 06/36/OMC/A2/2001-10, Dt.06/05/2004. 159 - 161
98 11/OMC/PRE-B2/2003, Dt.07/05/2004. 162 - 164
99 14/OMC/B.1/2002, Dt.10/05/2004 165 - 166
100 11/OMC/S.P.F/Medak/2/B2/2003, Dt.10-05-2004 167 – 168
101 11/OMC/B1/S.E/2004, Dt.10-05-2004 169
* * *
68
Proceedings No.06/OMC/KMM/A2/2003-1, dated 29-09-2003
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Sericulture Department – Representation from

Sri V. Venkata Ramana, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture,
Bhadrachalam, Khammam District – Proceedings –Issued.
Ref: Representation of Sri V. Venkata Ramana, Asst. Inspector of

Sericulture, Bhadrachalam, Khammam Dist. Dated 06-08-03.
*****
Sri V. Venkata Ramana, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture, Bhadrachalam,

Khammam District has submitted a representation to O.M.C.(SPF) stating that
he was appointed as Farm Foreman (Dist. Cadre post) and was allotted to
Bhadrachalam, Khammam District (Zone-V), but he is a native of Anantapur
District, Zone-IV and requested to transfer him to his native Zone-IV Anantapur
district on the grounds that his Wife”s ill-health as she is under going long term
treatement at „NIMHANS‟ Bangalore.
Sri V. Venkata Ramana was appointed in the year 1985 as Farm Foreman,
Grade-II (District Cadre Post) in Khammam District, Zone-V of Telangana region
as non-local candidate by the Director of Sericulture, Hyderabad.
The initial mistake was that in making the selection for training, the
Department should have kept in view the number of vacancies in each district,
because, the trained-candidates were ultimately appointed in those vacancies.
The merit list should have been districtwise and postings should also have been
on the basis of local candidate for local cadre. Even if there were any “Local”
candidates from the local Employment Exchanges of these Districts, they might
have been weeded out initially itself by following the merit in B.Sc., examination
for all candidates together. It is not even very certain whether candidates were
called for from the different Employment Exchanges where Sericulture units are
located. If they were not called from different districts then the appropriate
thing was to select for training, district-wise. However, what has happened is
now „fait accompli‟, a case of deviation from Presidential Order, intended or
inadvertent one can never know.
The petitioner was posted not in the free merit quota where non-locals can
also figure, but in total violation of the Presidential Order, which was ignored
and no locals were selected trained or posted. However, at this stage the
candidate from Khammam District cannot be allotted back to Anantapur District
even if he takes last rank in seniority for the simple reason that according to the
Commissioner of Sericulture there were no direct recruitment vacancies of Asst.
Inspector of Sericulture available in Anantapur District. The Commission would
not consider it right to recommend creation of supernumerary vacancy for him.
He has to remain where he is. The only recommendation the Commission can
make is that as and when there is a clear vacancy in his local areas viz., Zone-IV
he may be posted to his local zone after verifying his local status with reference
to his educational record. In the HOD Office if there is a vacancy of Asst.
Inspector of Sericulture then the Anantapur man can be posted in that vacancy
after verifying his actual local status. Since transfers would have to be
sanctioned by the Government the Commission recommends to the Government
to approve this transfer as and when it is proposed in clear vacancy. The Head
of Department can enclose a copy of the Commission‟s Proceedings while
making the proposal to the Government if an when the vacancies are available.
Sd/-
J.M.GIRGLANI,
To
1. The Prl. Secretary to Government,
Agriculture and Co-op. (Seri.) Dept.
2. The Commissioner of Sericulture,

A.P., Hyderabad.
Copy to: Sri V. Venkata Ramana,

Asst. Inspector of Sericulture
Copy: to SF/SCs.
69
Proceedings No.06/OMC/KMM/A2/2003-2, Dt:30.09.2003
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Sericulture Department – Representation from Sri V.

Kesava Reddy, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture, Bhadrachalam,
Khammam District – Proceedings – Issued.
Ref: Representation of Sri V. Kesava Reddy, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture,

Bhadrachalam, Khammam District, dated 06-08-03.
* * *
Sri V. Kesava Reddy, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture, Bhadrachalam,

Khammam District has submitted a representation to O.M.C.(SPF) stating that
he was appointed as Farm Foreman (Dist. Cadre Post) and was allotted to
Bhadrachalam, Khammam District (Zone-V), but he is a native of Anantapur
District, Zone-IV and requested to transfer him to his native Zone-IV Anantapur
district on the grounds that his parents become very old and they need health
care as he is only son to look after them.
Sri V. Kesava Reddy, was appointed in the year 1985 as Farm Foreman,
Grade-II (District Cadre post) in Khammam District, Zone-V of Telangana region
as non-local candidate by the Director of Sericulture, Hyderabad.
The initial mistake was that in making the selection for training, the
Department should have kept in view the number of vacancies in each district,
because, the trained-candidates were ultimately appointed to these vacancies.
The merit list should have been district wise and postings should also have been
on the basis of local candidate for local cadre. If there were any candidates
from the local Employment Exchanges of these Districts, they would obviously
be weeded out initially itself by following the merit in B.Sc examination for all
candidates together. It is not even very certain whether candidates were called
for from the different Employment Exchanges where Sericulture units are
located. If they did call for from different districts then the appropriate thing
was to select for training, district wise. However, what has happened is now
„fait accompli‟, a case of deviation from Presidential Order, intended or
inadvertent one can never know.
The Petitioner was posted not in the free merit quota where non-locals can
also figure, but in total violation of the Presidential Order, which was ignored
and no locals were selected, trained or posted. However, at this stage the
candidate from Khammam District cannot be allotted back to Anantapur District
even if he takes last rank in seniority for the simple reason that according to the
Commissioner of Sericulture there were no direct recruitment vacancies of Asst.
Inspector of Sericulture available in Anantapur District. The Commission would

not consider it right to recommend creation of supernumerary vacancy for him.
He has to remain where he is. The only recommendation the Commission can
make is that as and when there is a clear vacancy in his local areas viz., Zone-IV
he may be posted to his local zone after verifying his local status with reference
to his educational record. In the HOD Office if there is a vacancy of Asst.
Inspector of Sericulture then the Anantapur man can be posted in that vacancy
after verifying his actual local status. Since transfers would have to be
sanctioned by the Government the Commission recommends to the Government
to approve this transfer as and when it is proposed in clear vacancy. The Head
of Department can enclose a copy of the Commissions Proceedings while making
the proposal to the Government if and when the vacancies are available.
Sd/-
J.M.GIRGLANI,
To
1. The Prl. Secretary to Government,
Agriculture and Co-op.(Seri.) Dept.
2. The Commissioner of Sericulture,

A.P., Hyderabad.
Copy to: Sri V. Kesava Reddy, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture.
Copy to SF/SC.
70

Lr.No.06/74/OMC/B1/2001, Dt. 15-10-2003.
From
Hyderabad.
To
The Commissioner of Intermediate Education,
Near Latha Talkies,
Nampally,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC – SPF – Implementation of G.O.Ms.No.610, G.A (SPF A) Dept,
Dt.30-12-1985 and provisions of Presidential Order 1975 – Representations from
individuals – Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from S/Sri. T. Jagannadham, Jr. Lecturer in

Chemistry, Medak District, A.J Harish Kumar, Junior Lecturer in
English, Medak, M. Jhansi Lakshmi, Junior Lecturer in Chemistry,
Medak received by the One Man Commission on 17-09-2001.
2. Your Lr.Rc.No.Ser.II-1/3598/01, dt.03-07-2002.
3. Representation from Dr. C.H. Goverdhan, Jr. Lecturer in Chemistry,
Nalgonda dt.09-07-2002.
4. Your Lr.Rc.No.7639/C2/2001, dt.14-11-01 and 21-11-01.
* * *
I invite your attention to the references cited, regarding the repatriation of

the part time Lecturers to their respective “native zones” without foregoing any
service rendered, in proceedings Rc.No.4606/B1/2000, dt.20-10-2000, which
gave raise to this representation.
On this issue the Commission observes that the part – time Lecturers
should have been adjusted not in their “native zones” as was done vide the
proceedings issued in pursuance of the Government Orders in G.O.Ms. No. 259,
Education, dated 12-10-1999 but only to the zones in which they would be “local
candidates under Presidential Order”.
I therefore, request you to take necessary action in the matter, and review
the order accordingly under intimation to the Commission.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to: 1. Sri T.Jagannadham, Jr. Lecturer in Chemistry, Government

Junior College, Shankarampet (R) Medak District.
2. Sri A.J Harish Kumar, Jr. Lecturer in English, Government Junior
College (Boys), Medak 502 110.
3. M.Jhansi Lakshmi, Junior Lecturer in Chemistry, Government Junior
College (Girls), Siddipet, Medak District
4. Dr C.H.Goverdhan, Junior Lecturer in Chemistry, Government Junior
College, Suryapet, Nalgonda District.
71
Lr.No. 06/60/OMC (SPF)/ B1/2001, Dt. 29-10-2003.
From
Hyderabad.
To
Sri D. Kumara Swamy,
Jr. Lecturer in Economics,
S.K.S.D. Mahila Kalasala,
Tanuku,
West Godavari Dist.
Sir,
Sub: OMC(SPF)– Representation of Sri D. Kumara Swamy, Junior

Lecturer in Economics, S.K.S.D. Mahila Kalasala, Tanuku, W.G.Dist. –
Transfer to any Jr. College near his native native place (Ramayampet) Medak
District – G.O.Ms. No. 610 – Reg.
Ref: Your representation dated: Nil received on 25-08-01 and

12-07-02.
* * *
I inform you that, your representation cited, regarding request for transfer
from Tanuku to your native place has been examined by this Commission and it
was found that your request does not fall under the purview of this Commission
since the Presidential Order does not apply to Aided Institutions.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
72
Lr.No. 11/OMC/WGL-21/B1/2002, Dt. 05-11-2003.
From
Hyderabad.
To
The Director of Prosecutions,
D.G.P. Office Premises,
Lakdi-ka-Pool,
Hyderabad.(W.E)
Sir,
Sub: OMC–SPF – Post of Asst. Public Prosecutor – Certain clarification –

Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from Smt. P. Suseela, A.P.P., J.F.C.M.C.,

Mahaboobabad, Warangal District, dated 28-08-2002.
2. OMC Lr.No. 11/OMC/WRL-21/2002, dated 31.08.2002.
* * *
The representation of Smt. P.Suseela, Asst. Public Prosecutor has been

examined by this Commission. After being gazetted, in the year 1986, the post
of Assistant Public Prosecutor, legally becomes a State-wide post, not
withstanding the Service Rules or any other facts.
For treating all such posts (gazetted after 18-10-1975) as Zonal Posts
with 70% reservation for locals, the Government of India‟s orders are to be
obtained by the Department by sending proposals to that extent, through their
Secretariat Department and General Administration (SPF) Department. Till then
the legal position can not be changed by any executive order. The Service Rules
treating the post of Asst. Public Prosecutor as zonal post also become invalid till
Government of India orders as suggested above are obtained.
Regarding the posts of the Department, which are already included in the
Third Schedule at Sl.No. 16 – Asst. Public Prosecutors – Grade – I/ Police
Prosecuting Officers (as the posts of Revenue / Police Departments respectively)
it is observed that in the Service Rules (Issued by the Home (Courts.C)
Department vide G.O.Ms. No.188 dated 30-3-92) of the A.P. State Prosecuting
Service, these posts of Asst. Public Prosecutor Grade – I / Police Prosecuting
Officer, however, do not find place. Instead the first and second gazetted posts
of the Service are given as Asst. Public Prosecutor and Senior Asst. Public
Prosecutor – both as Zonal cadre posts. Hence, action is also to be taken to
change the designations of these posts in the Third Schedule under Home
Department by sending the proposals to Government of India, in this regard.
A copy of the reply given to the petitioner, first cited, is also enclosed
herewith for your information.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
for ONE MAN COMMISSION (SPF)
Copy to: The Secretary to Government, Law (Legislative Affairs and

Justice), A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad for information and
necessary action. (W.E.)
Copy to : Secretary to Government, G.A. (SPF-A) Department for

information and necessary action.
73
Lr.No. 11/OMC/WGL-21/B1/2002, Dt. 05-11-2003.
From
Hyderabad.
To
Smt. P. Suseela,
Assistant Public Prosecutor
J.F.C.M. Court,
Mahaboobabad,
Warangal District.
Madam,
Sub: OMC–SPF – Smt. P. Suseela, A.P.P. in J.F.C.M.C, Mahaboobabad,

Warangal district – request for transfer to Visakhapatnam Zone I –
Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from Smt. P. Suseela, A.P.P., J.F.C.M.C.,

Mahaboobabad, Warangal District, dated 28-08-2002.
2. OMC Lr.No. 11/OMC/WRL-21/2002, dated 31.08.2002.
* * *
With reference to your representation 1st cited, the matter has been
examined by the One Man Commission. It was found in the process that the post
of Assistant Public Prosecutor remains a “Gazetted Post with State-wide
jurisdiction” – as the same was not included in the Third Schedule of the
Presidential Order in the Specified Gazetted Category, after its gazetting in the
year 1986, to treat it as Zonal post. Hence, till such an inclusion, takes place,
neither the post can be treated, in retrospect, as a Specified Gazetted Category
post nor the unit of appointment can be a Zone as prescribed in the A.P. State
Prosecution Service Rules.
Hence, you are informed that legally no violation of Presidential Order can
be attributed to your appointment.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to: The Secretary to Government, Law (Legislative Affairs and

Justice), A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad for information.
The Director of Prosecutions, D.G.P. Office Premises,
Lakdi-ka-Pool, Hyderabad for information.
74
Proceeding No. 6/51/OMC/A2/2001 – 3, dt.10-11-2003
Sub: OMC(SPF) – Sericulture Department – Representation from Sri. D.

Muralidhar Reddy, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture – Proceedings
Issued.
Ref: 1.From Sri D. Muralidhar Reddy, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture,

O/o.Deputy Director of Sericulture, Warangal dated 15-07-2001.
2. From the Commissioner of Sericulture, Hyderabad,

Lr.Rc.No. 4560/2001-B1, dated 11-07-2002.
***
Sri D. Muralidhar Reddy, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture O/o.Deputy
Director of Sericulture, Warangal has submitted a representation to OMC, stating
that he has appointed in Sericulture Department and allotted to Zone – V as
Asst. Inspector of Sericulture. But persons belonging to other Zones, appointed
in Zone – V in violation of Presidential Order got promotion as Inspector of
Sericulture in Zone – V effecting his promotional chances to the post of
Inspector of Sericulture and therefore requested to set right anomaly so as to
enable him to get his seniority and promotion.
In a meeting held with the Officials of the Commissioner of Sericulture,

Hyderabad it has stated that vide their office Pro.Rc.No. 4605/87/B2, dated 5-3-
1988 five candidates were appointed including the petitioner as Asst. Inspectors
of Sericulture in Zone – V and that out of five candidates, one Candidate i.e. Sri.
Ashok Kumar who belongs to Zone – VI, Medak Dist., has been appointed as
Asst. Inspector of Sericulture in Zone – V as non-local candidate under 30%
quota as per the provisions of the Presidential Order and later by virtue of his
seniority in Zone – V and eligibility Sri Ashok Kumar got promotion as Inspector
of Sericulture in Zone – V. It has also been confirmed that the appointments
were made purely on merit based on the performance at Central Silk Board
Training Institute.
The Commission observes that there is no violation of Presidential Order,

to interfere in the matter.
J.M.GIRGLANI,
To
Sri D. Muralidhar Reddy,
Asst. Inspector of Sericulture,
O/o. Deputy Director of Sericulture, Warangal.
Copy to
The Commissioner of Sericulture, Hyderabad.
Agriculture & Co-op.(Seri.) Department,
SF/SCs.
//Forwarded by Order//
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
75
Proceeding No. 6/51/OMC/A2/2001-4, dt. 10-11-2003
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Sericulture Department – Representation from

Sri. J. Devender Rao, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture –
Proceedings Issued.
Ref: 1.From Sri J. Devender Rao, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture, O/o.Asst.

Director of Sericulture, I.T.D.A., Eturunagaram, dated 15-07-2001.

Lr.Rc.No. 4560/2001-B1, dated 11-07-2002.
***
Sri J. Devender Rao, Asst. Inspector of Sericulture O/o.Asst. Director of
Sericulture, I.T.D.A., Eturunagaram has submitted a representation to OMC,
stating that he has appointed in Sericulture Department and allotted to Zone – V
as Asst. Inspector of Sericulture. But persons belonging to other Zones,
appointed in Zone – V in violation of Presidential Order got promotion as
Inspector of Sericulture in Zone – V effecting his promotional chances to the
post of Inspector of Sericulture and therefore requested to set right anomaly so
as to enable him to get his seniority and promotion.
In a meeting held with the Officials of the Commissioner of Sericulture,

Hyderabad it has stated that vide their office Pro.Rc.No. 4605/87/B2, dated 5-3-
1988 five candidates were appointed including the petitioner as Asst. Inspectors
of Sericulture in Zone – V and that out of five candidates, one Candidate i.e. Sri.
Ashok Kumar who belongs to Zone – VI, Medak Dist., has been appointed as
Asst. Inspector of Sericulture in Zone – V as non-local candidate under 30%
quota as per the provisions of the Presidential Order and later by virtue of his
seniority in Zone – V and eligibility Sri Ashok Kumar got promotion as Inspector
of Sericulture in Zone – V. It has also been confirmed that the appointments
were made purely on merit based on the performance at Central Silk Board
Training Institute.
The Commission observes that there is no violation of Presidential Order,

to interfere in the matter.
J.M.GIRGLANI,
To
Sri J. Devender Rao,
Asst. Inspector of Sericulture,
O/o. Asst. Director of Sericulture, I.T.D.A., Eturunagaram.
Copy to
Agriculture & Co-op.(Seri) Department,
SF/SCs.
//Forwarded by Order//
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
76
Ph:(O) 040-23452663
Tele Fax: 040-23452663
D.O.Lr.No. 6/114/OMC/A3/2001, dt. 13–11-2003.

Dear Shri
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Proceedings issued on the representation of Sri R.

Ashok Babu, P.A. to G.M. (G.A.) – APDDCF – Reg.
Ref: 1. OMC (SPF) Lr.No.6/114/OMC/A3/2001, dt. 26-12-2002.

2. From the M.D., APDDCF Ltd., Hyderabad,
Lr.No. Per-I/B1/1329/2003, dt. 24-03-03.
3. OMC (SPF) Lr.No. 6/114/OMC/A3/2001, dt. 04-04-03.
4. From A.H.,D.D.&F. Department U.O.note
No. 5903/Dy.II/1/03 dated 16-10-2003.
5. From the APDDCF G.M. (Fin & Per.)
Lr.No. 1329/Per-I/B2/2003, dt.30-10-2003.
***
In the reference 1st cited the Commission‟s Proceedings were issued on

the representation of Sri R. Ashok Babu, Personal Assistant to General Manager
(G.A.) Andhra Pradesh Dairy Development Co-operative Federation Limited
(APDDCF Ltd.) to the said Proceedings, the M.D., APDDCF Ltd., in his letter 2 nd
cited, stated that the APDDCF Ltd., is an autonomous body and formulated its
own service regulations for its employees and that Six Point Formula is not
applicable to the Federation.
This Commission in its letter dated 4-4-03 clarified that the “Presidential
Order once adopted voluntarily by an Organization cannot be revoked at will and
having adopted it, the principles of the Presidential Order must guide the
actions of the Federation without favour or prejudice to individual candidates of
any local area/zone”. A copy of the letter is enclosed herewith for ready
reference. The references 4th & 5th cited do not reflect this picture inspite of the
earlier resolutions of the Board Meetings of the Federation. In view of this
position OMC‟s intervention is not uncalled for interference as the M.D. has
chosen to remark. Once Presidential Order is adopted there is no scope for its
capricious application in individual cases, nor do the Service Rules over-ride the
Presidential Order. Government may kindly examine the case in this light.
Pending of the writ need not stand in the way of righting a wrong unless court
order binds the hands.
Please bestow your attention to the matter for necessary action.
Yours Sincerely,
Sd/-
(J.M.GIRGLANI)
To
Sri S.P. Singh, IAS.,
Prl. Secy. to Government,(I/C)
AHDD&F(Dy.II) Department.(w.e.)
Copy to: The M.D., APDDCF Ltd., Hyderabad.

77
Proceeding No. 11/OMC/WRL./A2/2001, dt.20-11-2003
Sub: OMC(SPF) – Sericulture Department – Representation

from Sri M. Ramesh, Inspector of Sericulture – Proceedings – Issued.
Ref: 1. From Sri M. Ramesh Inspector of Sericulture, O/o. Deputy Director

of Sericulture, Warangal, representation dated 16-07-2001.
Lr.Rc.No. 4560/2001-B1, dated 11-07-2002.
***
Sri M. Ramesh, Inspector of Sericulture vide representation 1st cited, has

submitted that he was appointed as Asst. Inspector of Sericulture in the year
1983 as a candidate sponsored by Dist. Employment Exchange and after
completion of Post Graduate Diploma in Sericulture at Central Sericulture
Research & Training Institute (CSR & TI) Ranchi. He belongs Zone – V. He got
promotion as Inspector of Sericulture in May 1985. But in the seniority list 8
Inspectors from other Zones were placed above him and due to that his seniority
and promotional chances were effected and therefore requested the OMC(SPF)
to rectify the anomaly and to order for his seniority above those 8 persons.
The Commissioner of Sericulture has stated that the individuals specified

by the petitioner were appointed prior to the appointment of the Petitioner as
Asst. Inspectors of Sericulture in their respective Zones and they were promoted
as Inspectors of Sericulture around the date of appointment of the petitioner in
the Department. Their seniority was shown in their respective Zones only and
they were given their further promotions also accordingly. The promotion of the
Petitioner as Inspector of Sericulture was considered according to his seniority in
his Zone and none of the persons referred by him in his representation have
affected his promotional chances.
The Commission has gone into the record and holds that the post of the
Inspector of Sericulture being a Gazetted post with State-wide jurisdiction (Since
it has not been included in the Third Schedule of the Presidential Order so far)
no violation of the Presidential Order could be attributed to this case, since the
persons in question were posted to Zone-V as Inspectors of Sericulture.
The Petition is hereby rejected.
J.M. GIRGLANI,
ONE MAN COMMISSION(SPF)
To
Sri M. Ramesh,
Inspector of Sericulture, Warangal.
Copy to:
The Agriculture & Co-op.(Seri.) Dept.
The TNGO‟s Union, Warangal.

SF/SC.
//Forwarded by order//
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
78
Proceeding No. 11/OMC/WRL./A2/2001, dt. 20-11-2003

from Sri S. Dattatreya Rao, Inspector of Sericulture – Proceedings
– Issued.
Ref: 1. From Sri S. Dattatreya Rao, Inspector of Sericulture, O/o Regional

Joint Director of Sericulture, Warangal, representation dt:16-7-01.
Lr.Rc.No. 4560/2001-B1, dated 11-07-2002.
***
Sri S. Dattatreya Rao, Inspector of Sericulture vide representation 1 st

cited, has submitted that he was appointed as Asst. Inspector of Sericulture in
the year 1984 as a candidate sponsored by Dist. Employment Exchange and
after completion of Post Graduate Diploma in Sericulture at Central Sericulture
Research and Training Institute, Ranchi. He belongs Zone – V. He got promotion
as Inspector of Sericulture in May 1985. But in the seniority list ten Inspectors
from other Zones were placed above him and due to that his seniority and
promotional chances were effected and therefore requested the OMC (SPF) to
rectify the anamoly and to order for his seniority above those ten persons.
The Commissioner of Sericulture has stated that the individuals specified

by the petitioner were appointed prior to the appointment of the Petitioner as
Asst. Inspector of Sericulture in their respective Zones, and they were promoted
as Inspectors of Sericulture around the date of appointment of the petitioner in
the Department. Their seniority was shown in their respective Zones only and
they were given their further promotions also accordingly. The promotion of the
Petitioner as Inspector of Sericulture was considered according to his seniority in
his Zone and none of the persons referred by him in his representation have
affected his promotional chances.
The Commission has gone into the record and holds that the post of the
Inspector of Sericulture being a Gazetted post with State-wide jurisdiction (Since
it has not been included in the Third Schedule of the Presidential Order so far)
no violation of the Presidential Order could be attributed to his case since the
persons in question were posted in Zone-V as Inspectors of Sericulture.
The Petition is hereby rejected.
J .M. GIRGLANI,
To
Sri S. Dattatreya Rao
Inspector of Sericulture, Warangal.
Copy to:
The Agriculture & Coop.(Seri.) Dept.
The TNGO‟s Union, Warangal.

SF/SC.
// Forwarded by order//
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
79
Proceeding No. 11/OMC/WRL./8/A2/2001-4, dt.27-11-2003
Sub: OMC(SPF) – Sericulture Department – Representation of Sri M.

Thirupathi, Farm Foreman, Warangal District – Proceedings -
Issued.
Ref:1. From the Telangana Non- Gazetted Sericulture Employees

Central Union representation dated 31-07-2001.
2. From Sri M. Thirupathi, Farm Foreman, O/o. Asst. Director of

Sericulture, Warangal dated 30-7-2001.
3. From the Commissioner of Sericulture, Lr.No.Rc.No.4056/2001-B1,

dated Nil.
***
In the references first and second cited, the Telangana Non-Gazetted
Sericulture Employees Central Union, Warangal and Sri M. Thirupathi, Farm
Foreman, O/o. Asst. Director of Sericulture, Warangal have submitted
representations stating that in zone – V other Zone Employees in the cadres of
Farm Foremen, Asst. Inspectors of Sericulture and Inspectors of Sericulture
were given postings since 1983 and they were benefited in getting promotions in
their respective cadres and that as a result of this, injustice has been done to
Zone – V employees who were stagnated in the appointed cadres particularly in
the cadre of Farm Foremen.
The Commissioner of Sericulture, Hyderabad has submitted that the

Department of Sericulture was formed on 20-4-1981. The candidates from
different Employment Exchanges were called for and the selected candidates
were sent for training at Central Sericulture Research and Training Institutes
(CSR &TI) Mysore/Berhampure/Ranchi. The candidates were sponsored and
selected for the training purpose only and were not given any assurance of
appointment in the Department at the time of their selection for training.
The Commissioner of Sericulture further stated that Government

sanctioned schemes in many districts without supporting staff and the
candidates who have already completed STC/PGDS training by that time were
given appointments according to the availability of vacancies in the
Districts/Zones. As a result of which some of the non-locals were appointed in
Telangana area due to non-sanction of sufficient posts in those Districts.
However, subsequently they were sent to their native districts/zones and in
several cases their seniority was also assigned in their respective native
zones/districts.
However, on going through the record it is observed that the initial

mistake was that in making the selection for training, the Department should
have kept in view the number of vacancies in each district, because, the trained
candidates were ultimately to be appointed to these vacancies. The merit list
should have been district-wise and postings should also have been on the basis
of local candidate for local cadre. If there were any non-local candidates from
the local Employment Exchanges of these Districts, they would obviously, been
weeded out initially itself by following the merit in B.Sc. examination for all
for from the different Employment Exchanges where Sericulture units were
located. If they did call for from different districts then the appropriate thing was
to select for training, district-wise. However, what has happened is now „fact
accompli‟, a case of deviation from Presidential Order, intended or inadvertent
one can never know.
However, at this stage the non-local candidates from Warangal District

cannot be allotted back to their native District even if they takes last rank in
seniority for the simple reason and that according to the Commissioner of
Sericulture there were no direct recruitment vacancies of Asst. Inspector of
Sericulture available in their native Districts. The Commission would not consider
it right to recommend creation of supernumerary vacancies for non-locals. The
only recommendation the Commission can make is that as and when there is a
clear vacancy in their local areas they may be posted to their local Zones after
verifying their local status with reference to para 7 of the Presidential Order or
else in the HOD Office if there are vacancies of Asst. Inspector of Sericulture
they can be posted in those vacancies after verifying their local status. Since
transfers would have to be sanctioned by the Government, the Commission
recommends to the Government to approve this transfer as and when it is
proposed in clear vacancies. The Head of Department can enclose a copy of the
Commission‟s Proceedings while making the proposal to the Government if and
when the vacancies arise.
J.M.GIRGLANI,
To
The Commissioner of Sericulture,
Hyderabad.
Agriculture & Co-op.(Seri) Department.
Sri M. Thirupathi,
Farm Foreman,
O/o. Asst. Director of Sericulture,
Warangal.
TNGO‟s Union, Warangal,

SF/SCs.
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
80
Sub: OMC(SPF) – Sericulture Department – Representation of Sri Md.

Yousufuddin, Farm Foreman, Warangal District – Proceedings -
Issued.

2. From Sri Md. Yousufuddin, Farm foreman, O/o. Dy. Director of

Sericulture, Warangal dated 30-7-2001.
3. From the Commissioner of Sericulture, Lr.No.Rc.No. 4056/2001-B1,

dated Nil.
***

Sericulture Employees Central Union, Warangal and Sri Md. Yousufuddin, Farm
Foreman, O/o. Deputy Director of Sericulture, Warangal have submitted
representations stating that in Zone – V other zone employees in the cadres of
their respective cadres and that as a result of this injustice has been done to
zone – V employees who were stagnated in the appointed cadres particularly in
The Commissioner of Sericulture, Hyderabad submitted that the

different Employment Exchanges were called for and the selected candidates
were sent for training at Central Sericulture Research & Training Institute (CSR
& TI), Mysore/ Berhampure/ Ranchi. The candidates were sponsored and
selected for the training purpose only and were not given any assurance of
appointment in the Department at the time of their selection for training.

zones/districts.

one can never know.

transfers would have to be sanctioned by the Government the Commission
J.M.GIRGLANI,
To
Hyderabad.
Agriculture & Co-op.(Seri) Department,
Sri Md. Yousufuddin,

Farm Foreman,
O/o. Deputy Director of Sericulture,
Warangal.

SF/SCs.
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
81
Sub: OMC(SPF) – Sericulture Department – Representation of Sri M.V.R.

Ramesh, Farm Foreman, Warangal District – Proceedings - Issued.

2. From Sri M.V.R. Ramesh, Farm foreman, O/o. Dy. Director of

Sericulture, Warangal dated Nil.
3. From the Commissioner of Sericulture, Lr.No.Rc.No. 4056/2001-B1,

dated Nil.
***
Sericulture Employees Central Union, Warangal and Sri M.V.R. Ramesh, Farm
Foreman, O/o. Deputy Director of Sericulture, Warangal have submitted
representations stating that in Zone - V other Zone Employees in the cadres of
their respective cadres and that as a result of this injustice has been done to
Zone – V employees who were stagnated in the appointed cadres particularly in
The Commissioner of Sericulture, Hyderabad submitted that the

different Employment Exchanges were called-for and the selected candidates
were sent for training at Central Sericulture Research & Training Institute (CSR
& TI), Mysore/Berhampure/Ranchi. The candidates were sponsored and selected
for the training purpose only and were not given any assurance of appointment
in the department at the time of their selection for training.

zones/districts.

one can never know.

transfers would have to be sanctioned by the Government the Commission
J.M.GIRGLANI,
To
Hyderabad.
Agriculture & Co-op.(Seri) Department.
Sri M.V.R. Ramesh,

Farm Foreman,
O/o. Deputy Director of Sericulture,
Warangal.

SF/SCs.
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER
82
Proceedings No.11/OMC/B1/SE/2003, Dated:12-12-2003.
Sub: OMC – SPF – School Education Department – Establishment –

Representation of the Chairman, Telangana Employees Co-ordination
Committee on Violation of G.O.Ms.No.610 and for the repatriation of
Smt. D. Shanthivardhani, B.A., B.Ed., S.G.T from Jawahar Bal
Bhavan to her native District i.e., East Godavari District- Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from the Chairman, Telangana Employees Co-

ordination Committee, H.No.7-2-742/4, Mallepally, Hyderabad,
dated: NIL.
2. From the School Education (Prog.II.1) Department U.O.Note

No.17200/Prog.II-1/2003-1, dated: 31.10.2003.
3. From the General Administration (SPF-A) Department Letter No.

12663/SPF.A/2003, dated 04-12-2003.
***
ORDER:-
The Chairman of Telangana Employees Co-ordination Committee,

Hyderabad in his representation cited has reported that Smt.D.Shanthivardhani,
S.G.Teacher working at East Godavari District has been transferred on
deputation from East Godavari District to the O/o.Director of Jawahar Bal
Bhavan as Laboratory Assistant. Further it was stated that Smt. D.
Shanthivardhani, B.A., B.Ed., S.G.T. has been posted to the Directorate against
the rules and hence requested for the repatriation of Smt. D. Shanthivardhani to
her original post.
2. The issue has been examined in consultation with the Government in

School Education, General Administration (SPF) Department and Director of
Jawahar Bal Bhavan.
3. In this regard, the Department have reported that the Director of Jawahar
Bal Bhavan has been declared as a Head of the Department in G.O.Ms.No.1052,
Education Department, on 1.9.1975; the post of Lab. Assistant along with other
posts in Jawahar Bal Bhavan were declared as State Level posts as per Rule 14
of Presidential Order under the Saving Clause –“B” since the Department is
declared as Head of Department; the post sanctioned to the Department is a
State Level Post and hence the Six Point Formula and G.O.Ms.No.610 does not
apply in respect of the said posts of Directorate of Jawahar Bal Bhavan,

Hyderabad and also added that the deputation of Smt. D. Shantivardhani,
S.G.T., East Godavari District to Jawahar Bal Bhavan, Andhra Pradesh,
Hyderabad will not come under the purview of G.O.Ms.No.610 and also got the
concurrence of General Administration (SPF) Department.
4. This Commission after going through the records of the case holds that
the view taken by the School Education Department and General Administration
Department does not appear to be tenable on the following counts:-
1. As per Jawahar Bal Bhavan Subordinate Service Rules the Post of

“Laboratory Assistant” has neither a feeder channel for promotion or
deputation – but only to be filled through Direct Recruitment;
2. The post is to be filled through Direct Recruitment by a Bachelor of

Science (B.Sc.) – while the present incumbent who was irregularly
brought on deputation is a B.A. and B.Ed., (Arts Graduate).
3. In the Meeting held by OMC with the Department, the Department have
clearly mentioned that “ No deputation to Head of Department is
possible because there are no Subordinate Offices to Jawahar Bal
Bhavan”.
4. Smt. D. Shantivardhani belongs to a “District Cadre” post – S.G.T.

(Secondary Grade Teacher), its Unit of Appointment being only a
Mandal – in the A.P. Education Subordinate Services.
5. The deputation/transfer is not permissible between two different

Services, unless the rules so provide specifically. But no such provision
is available either in the A.P. Bal Bhavan Subordinate Service Rules or
in the A.P. Education Subordinate Service Rules.
6. The argument regarding the exemption of Head of Department

Employees under Rule 14 (b) of Presidential Order applies to the cadre
strength of the Directorate only and not to the deputationists.
Hence the Commission holds that the Government may issue necessary
orders in the matter to repatriate Smt. D. Shantivardhani from Director of
Jawahar Bal Bhavan to her original post in the East Godavari District.
Sd/-
J.M.GIRGLANI
To
School Education Department,
A.P. Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Copy to:-The Secretary to Government (Ser.), General Administration

Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad for information and necessary
action.
Copy to:-Sri Challa Nageswara Rao, Chairman, Telangana Employees Co-

ordination Committee, H.No.7-2-742/4,Mallepally, Hyderabad.
83
Lr.No. 06/92/OMC(A1)/I&CAD/2003-2, dated 16.12.2003
From
J.M. Girglani, IAS., (Retd.)
Hyderabad.
To
The President,
T.N.G.O‟s Central Union,
Telangana Bhawan,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Repatriate Sri M. Sanjeeva Sagar, Labour Officer of
S.R.S.P., Hanama Konda, Warangal to his native Zone-VI – Reg.
Ref:1. Your representation dated 01-09-2003 addressed to the Secretary,

I&CAD Department & Copy marked to this Commission.
2. Your representation dated 29-10-2003 addressed to the Secretary,
G.A.D & Copy marked to this Commission.
***
I invite your attention to the references cited and to inform you that the
individual case is a fact of the general issue & regarding absorption of surplus
staff in the Zones/Districts in which the individuals are locals, this issue is under
the active consideration of the Commission and the Government.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
84
Proceedings No. 06/89/1/OMC/B2/2001, Dated:17.12.2003.
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Sri S. Ranga Rao, I/C S.E.(RWS) Hyderabad –

Representation on Violation of Zonalisation of local cadres under SPF
– Proceedings - Issued.
Ref: 1. Representation from Sri S. Ranga Rao, I/C S.E. (RWS) Hyderabad
dated 17.07.2001 and 13.09.2003.
2. OMC Lr.No.06/89/1/OMC/B2/2001. dated 30.09.2003.
3. From the ENC (PRED) Hyderabad Lr.No.S-IV/SPF/2000 dated
13.11.2003.
---
In the reference first cited it has been represented that your right as a
local candidate of Zone V may be protected by replacing the non-local
candidates who were recently promoted as Chief Engineers (I/C).
The matter has been examined in consultation with the Engineer-in-

Chief and it was found that the following three of the Chief Engineers (I/C), in
question, have been allotted as Junior Engineers to Zone V vide the G.O.Ms.No.
902, PR (SPF) Department, dated 12-09-77, by the Allotment Committee
constituated for the purpose:-
1. K. Dasarath Ramaiah
2. P. Narsing Rao
3. Shaik Hussain Saheb
Sri A. Jagannatham was allotted to Zone V under the limited recruitment

held by the APPSC in 1979 while Sri C. Srinivas Rao belongs to Karimnagar
District and a local candidate of Zone V.
This Commission in its Preliminary Report it-self held that there was no
need to reopen the initial allotments made by the Allotment Committees as most
of the cases of alleged violations in this regard had gone in appeal as provided
under the Presidential Order against the initial allotment orders, to the State
Government, under Para 4(4) of the Presidential Order. Para 4(6) of the order
makes the order of the State Government in this regard, final.
As for Sri Jagannadham, further report is being called for to find out the
circumstances under which a local of Zone-II was allotted to Zone-V.
Sd/-
J.M.GIRGLANI
To
Sri S. Ranga Rao,
I/C Superintending Engineer (RWS),
Hyderabad.
Copy to:- The Prl. Secretary to Government, PR & RD Department,

A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad
Copy to:- The Secretary to Government, General Administration (SPF.A)

Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hydrabad.
Copy to:- The Engineer–in-Chief, Panchayat Raj, Errum Manzil, Hyderabad.

85
Lr.No.11/OMC/B1/2003, dated 20.12.2003
From
Hyderabad.
To
Education (H.E.) Department,
Secretariat,
Hyderabad.(w.e)
The Commissioner of Technical Education,

B.R.K.R. Bhawan,
Tankbund Road,
Hyderabad.(w.e)
Sir,
Sub: OMC – SPF – T.E. – Estt. – Sri A. Sai Baba, Sr. Assistant, Q.Q.
Government Polytechnic, Hyderabad – Objections to the seniority
list of Sr. Assistants – Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from Sri A. Sai Baba, Sr. Assistant, Q.Q.

Government Polytechnic, Hyderabad dated 12-11-2003
addressed to the Commissioner of Technical Education and
copied to the OMC (SPF) Hyderabad and Government.
2. OMC (SPF) Proceedings No. 06/63/OMC/B1/2001,dated 15-09-03.
* * *
Sri A. Sai Baba, Sr. Assistant, Q.Q. Government Polytechnic, Hyderabad
has represented regarding his seniority in the cadre of Junior Assistant as Non-
Locals both in the cadre of Junior Assistant and Typist who were appointed in
State Level Institutions have been promoted as Senior Assistants earlier to him
while the seniority of the employees of City Zone was to be maintained
separately and promotions given. And he has also quoted specific details of the
alleged violations.
The representation submitted by him is enclosed herewith. It appears to

be identical to the case of Sri J. Yadaiah. Hence please take suitable action on
the same with reference to the proceedings issued by this Commission on the
representation of Sri J. Yadaiah, Sr. Assistant, Q.Q. Government Polytechnic,
Hyderabad in the reference second cited.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to: Sri A. Sai Baba, Sr. Assistant, Q.Q. Government Polytechnic,
Hyderabad – 64.
86
Proceedings No. 06/34/OMC/A2/2003, dt.26-12-2003

of Sri K. Laxmaiah, Farm Foreman, O/o. Assistant Director of
Sericulture, Karimnagar District – Request for transfer to Zone –
VI - Proceedings on the Representation – Issued.
Ref: 1. From Sri K. Laxmaiah, Farm Foreman, O/o. Assistant Director of

Sericulture, Karimnagar District, dt.19-12-03.
2. OMC Lr.No. 06/33/OMC /A/2001-3 dated 17-09-2002.
***
Sri K. Laxmaiah, Farm Foreman, O/o. Assistant Director of Sericulture,

Karimnagar District has submitted a representation to OMC (SPF) stating that he
belongs to Mahaboobnagar District and that the District Employment Exchange,
Mahaboobnagar sponsored his name for the post of Farm Foreman in Sericulture
Department during the year 1985 and he was selected for training at CSR&TI,
Mysore. After completion of his training he was appointed as Farm Foreman
Grade-II vide Proc.Rc.No.15333/86-B4, dated 19-01-1987 in Karimnagar District
and working there since his appointment. He contended that he was sponsored
by District Employment Exchange, Mahaboobnagar District, but was posted to
Karimnagar District in contravention of the Presidential Order and hence
requested to post him in Mahaboobnagar District.
The Commissioner of Sericulture, who was consulted in similar cases has

reported that individuals were sponsored through District Employment
Exchanges for the (6) months short term training course at Mysore, and no
appointment orders against any post were given. Neither the Department has
given any commitment for appointment to a particular post in a District and that
the individuals were appointed as Farm Foremen in various Districts to
implement the new schemes sanctioned by Government in Telangana area, and
that the orders given by the Department were accepted by the individuals who
joined in the Department willingly.
The individual has also represented that he has given willingness to work
as Panchayat Secretary in Mahaboobnagar District and the District Collector,
Mahaboobnagar has already given his consent to utilise his services as
Panchayat Secretary in Mahaboobnagar District. Earlier while considering the
Representation of this Petitioner, this Commission opined that, “once a person is
appointed in the merit quota in any district where he is a non-local he has no
right to claim to transfer to a District where he is a local and that the person
make a request to Government who may consider it in the light of the transfer
policy, but not as a right under the Presidential Order”, with the view that the
candidates were posted on “merit basis” to the Districts, where they were non-
locals.
However, on further consideration of the other cases of similar nature

pertaining to the Department it was found that the initial mistake was that in
making the selection for training, the Department should have kept in view the
number of vacancies in each District, because, the trained candidates were
ultimately to be appointed in to those vacancies. The merit list should have been
District-wise and postings should also have been on the basis of “Local
candidates for local cadre”, since the candidates were called for from different
District Employment Exchanges where Sericulture units were located. Since
they called candidates from different Districts, the appropriate thing would have
been to select for training district-wise. However, whatever has happened is now
„fait accompli‟ a case of deviation from Presidential Order, intended or
inadvertent, one can never know.
At this juncture the Petitioner working in Karimnagar District cannot be

ordered to be allotted back to Mahaboobnagar District, even if he takes last rank
in seniority at this distance of time, nor the creation of a supernumerary post
can be recommended. However, since the Collector, Mahaboobnagar District has
accepted to utilise the services of the Petitioner as Panchayat Secretary in

Mahaboobnagar District it would be appropriate for the Government in the given
circumstances, to facilitate his transfer from Karimnagar District to
Mahaboobnagar for his appointment as Panchayat Secretary in one of the
existing vacancies, since his appointment in Karimnagar District was in violation
of the Presidential Order.
J.M.GIRGLANI
To
Agriculture &Co-operation (Sericulture) Deptt.
The Commissioner of Sericulture, A.P., Hyderabad.
Copy to: 1.The Individual.
2. SF/SC.
// FORWARDED BY ORDER//
Sd/-
SECTION OFFICER.
87
Lr.No.11/OMC/B1/I/2003, dated 12.01.2004
From
J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS., (Retd.)
Hyderabad.
To
Education (H.E.) Department,
Secretariat,
Hyderabad.(w.e)
The Commissioner of Technical Education,

B.R.K.R. Bhavan,
Tankbund Road,
Hyderabad.(w.e)
Sir,
Sub: OMC – SPF – T.E. – Estt. – Sri Santosh P. Kivlekar, Sr. Assistant,
Government Polytechnic, Masab Tank, Hyderabad – Objections to
the seniority list of Sr. Assistants – Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from Sri Santosh P. Kivlekar, Sr. Assistant,

Government Polytechnic, Masab Tank, Hyderabad dated 29-12-
2003 addressed to the Commissioner of Technical Education and
copied to the OMC (SPF) Hyderabad and Government.
3. OMC (SPF) Proceedings No. 06/63/OMC/B1/2001,dated 15-09-03.
* * *
Sri Santosh P. Kivlekar, Sr. Assistant, Government Polytechnic, Masab
Tank, Hyderabad has represented regarding his seniority in the cadre of Junior
Assistant, as Non-Locals both in the cadre of Junior Assistant and Typist who
were appointed in State Level Institutions have been promoted as Senior
Assistants earlier to him while the seniority of the employees of City Zone was to
be maintained separately and promotions given. And he has also quoted specific
details of the alleged violations.
The representation submitted by him is enclosed herewith. It appears to

be identical to the case of Sri J. Yadaiah. Hence please take suitable action on
the same with reference to the proceedings issued by this Commission on the
representation of Sri J. Yadaiah, Sr. Assistant, Q.Q. Government Polytechnic,
Hyderabad in the reference second cited.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to: Sri Santosh P. Kivlekar, Sr. Assistant, Government Polytechnic, Masab
Tank, Hyderabad.
88

Lr.No. 06/91/OMC(A1)/2003-3, dated 21.01.2004
From
Hyderabad.(w.e)
To
The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn. Wing),
I & CAD Department,
Errum Manzil, Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Violation of SPF in Chief Engineer‟s Office, Telugu

Ganga Project, Srikalahasti – Transfer of certain staff on „OD‟ device
– Representation of Staff – Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation of Sri A.S. Ajaya Kumar, Sr. Asst, O/o. the C.E.,
TGP, Srikalahasti, dt.18.07.2003.
2. From the OMC (SPF) Lr.No.06/91/OMC(A1)/2003-1, dated

28.07.2003 and reminder thereon dated 20.10.2003.
3. From the E.N.C.(AW), I & CAD Department –

Lr.No.RC/ENC/D3/22670/2003 dated 30-10-2003 addressed to
C.E., TGP under copy marked to this Commission.
***
The original of the Representation, first cited, is enclosed herewith.
I invite your attention to the references cited and to request you to

examine the contents of the representation 1st cited and take suitable action as
per the OMC‟s Proceedings No.11/OMC/I&CAD/A1/2001 dated 21-05-2003,
(copy enclosed) issued on the subject of „Transfer through OD device‟, since the
contents of the Petition are also similar in nature.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to:
Sri A.S. Ajaya Kumar,
Sr. Assistant,
O/o. The C.E.,
TGP, Srikalahasti.
(for favour of information)
89
Lr.No. 11/OMC/B2 E.O/2004, dated 21.01.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
Smt. I. Jyothirmayi,
Extension Officer,
Panchayat Raj & Rural Dept.,
Bandi Atmakur Mandal Parishad,
Kurnool District, A.P.
Madam,
Sub: OMC - SPF – Smt. I. Jyothirmayi, E.O., PR&RD, Bandi Atmakur

Mandal Parishad, Kurnool District – Request for transfer to local
area (Zone) – Representation – Regarding.
Ref: Representation from Smt. I. Jyothirmayi, E.O., PR&RD, Bandi

Atmakur Mandal Parishad, Kurnool District, dated 01-01-2004.
***
Your request for transfer to zone II is apparently a case of Inter-Zonal
transfer with which this Commission is not concerned. You may, however,
approach the Government in this regard through proper channel.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
90
Lr.No.06/93/OMC (A.1)/2003-2, dated 31.01.2004
From
J.M.Girglani, IAS.,(Retd.)
One Man Commission
„K‟- Block, Room No. 320,
2nd Floor, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad.
To
The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn. Wing),
I & CAD Department, Errum Manzil,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Representation from Sri. M. Madhusudan, i/c Suptd.,
O/o the Executive Engineer, Godawari Lift Irrigation Scheme, Divn.
3, Hyderabad – Regarding.
Ref: 1. OMC(SPF) Proceedings No.06/68/OMC/A1/2003 dated 17.07.2003.

2. Representation from Sri M. Madhusudan, i/c Suptd., O/o the
Executive Engineer, Godawari Lift Irrigation Scheme, Divn. 3,
Hyderabad dated 15.09.2003.
3. OMC(SPF) Lr.No.6/93/OMC/A1/2003-1, dated 20.10.2003.
* * *
The original of the representation, 2nd cited is enclosed herewith.
I invite your attention to the references cited and to request you to

examine the contents of the representation 2nd cited and take suitable action as
per Rules in force, keeping in view the OMC‟s Proceedings 1 st cited and the
judgement of A.P.A.T., Hyderabad in O.A.No.6953/99 dated 8.2.2001.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to: Sri. M. Madhusudan,
I/c. Suptd., The Executive Engineer,
Godawari Lift Irrg. Scheme, Divn. 3,
Hyderabad (for favour of Information)
91
Lr.No.06/59/OMC/B1/2001, dated 25.02.2004

From
Hyderabad.
To
Higher Education Department,
Sir,
Sub: One Man Commission (SPF) – Representation received with regard to
certain irregular appointments of Junior Lecturers in Zone-VI, with
non-local candidates, in the year 1997, by the A.P. College Service
Commission – Report called for - Regarding.
Ref: 1. Representation from Sri V. Shankaraiah, Nizamabad District, dated

18-08-2001.
2. Your Lr.No.12532/IE-1/2001-3 dated 06.12.2001.
3. OMC (SPF) Lr.No.06/59/OMC/B1/2001, dt.26.07.2003 addressed
to APPSC and copied to you.
* * *
Through Para 5 of your letter second cited, it is obvious that the College
Service Commission in its recruitment held in 1997 interpreted “40%” to be
purely a “non-local quota”, but not as the open merit quota. This position is in
contravention of Para 8 of the Presidential Order.
The posts of Junior Lecturers were created as gazetted posts to replace

the non-gazetted Tutors and Demonstrators in the Junior Colleges in the Higher
Education Department. The recruitment to these posts was made by the College
Service Commission treating them as “zonal posts” on the basis of their previous
position under the Presidential Order when they were non-gazetted. The College
Service Commission also gave 60% preference for locals in direct recruitment
of Junior Lecturers adopting the reservation percentage for locals that appears in
sub Para (3) of Para 8 of the Presidential Order, which applies only to the five
specific gazetted posts, viz., the Tahsildars, AEEs, Assistant Agricultural Officers,
Inspector of Police and Motor Vehicle Inspectors, mentioned therein. Hence the
action of the A.P. College Service Commission was an error because gazetted
posts become State-wide posts unless they are included in the Third
Schedule to the Presidential Order under Government of India‟s orders. Even
such inclusion does not bring any preference percentage to locals. In this case it
was obviously an error on the part of the College Service Commission, which
happened to bring undue reservation of 60% to the local candidates and a 40%
reservation to Non-locals. This rather gross error, has been perpetuated by the
Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission also as successors to the College
Service Commission, as informed by the A.P. Public Service Commission Officials
in the Meetings held by this Commission. It is not known whether the position
led to any litigation.
Government in the Education Department may kindly go into the matter to

enquire whether the A.P. College Service Commission and subsequently A.P.
Public Service Commission have treated the 40% of the vacancies for non-locals
exclusively, which means a reservation of 40% to non-locals, which further
aggrevates the error. The Education Department may kindly furnish a reply at
the earliest to this Commission for incorporation in its Report.
As for the right course of action, Government of India‟s orders may be

obtained by the Government in General Administration (SPF) Department :-
1) To treat the posts as Zonal.
2) To provide 70% preference for Local Candidates – in order to ensure

that the position before Gazetting is not mutated due to Gazetting of
the post.
This orders can only be prospectively applicable when issued.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
92
Proceedings No. 06/111/OMC/A1/2001, dated 15.03.2004
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Sri P. Shankaraiah, Senior Assistant, R.W.&M Sub-

Divn.II, T.B.C. Compound, Kurnool– Representation on restoration of
Seniority/protest on irregular zonal allotment to Sri V.A.V.
Rangachari to zone-IV – Proceedings - issued.
Ref:1. Representation from Sri P. Shankaraiah, Senior Assistant, R.W.&M

Sub-Divn.II, T.B.C. Compound, Kurnool, dated 16.07.2001.
2. From the Engineer-in-Chief (A.W), I & CAD Department

Lrs.No.RC/ENC/D3/20427/2001,dated 29.08.2002 and 27.1.04.
* * *
In the reference first cited it has been represented that your right as a
local candidate of zone-IV may be protected by replacing the non-local candidate
Sri. V.A.V. Rangachari, who belongs to zone–II.
The matter has been examined in consultation with the Engineer-in-Chief

(Administration) and it was found that the said Sri V.A.V Rangachari had been
allotted as Senior Assistant to Zone-IV by the Allotment Committee constituted
for the purpose.
This Commission does not reopen the initial allotments. Appeal against
such allotments lies to the State Government, under para 4(4) of the
Presidential Order.
Para 4(6) of the order makes the order of the State Government in this
regard, final.
J.M. GIRGLANI
To
Sri P. Sankariah,Senior Assistant,R.W.& M Sub-Divn.II, T.B.C.Compound,
Bhagya Nagar, Kurnool.
Copy to:-
The Prl. Secretary to Government, I&CAD Department,
The Secretary to Government, General Administration (SPF.A)

Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hydrabad.
The Engineer –in-Chief, (A.W), I&CAD Department, Errum Manzil, Hyderabad.
//Forwarded by order//
Sd/-
Section Officer
93
Lr.No. 06/90/OMC/A1/2003,dated 23.03.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
Sri P. Shanmugam,
Superintendent,
O/o. The Chief Engineer,
Telugu Ganga Project,
Srikalahasti.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – Violation of Six Point Formula in Chief Engineer‟s
Office, TGP, Srikalahasti – Representation – Reg.
Ref: Your representation to this Commission dated 18.07.2003.
***
I invite your attention to the reference cited and to inform you that the
individual case is a part of the “General Issue” regarding transfer through OD
device. This issue has been referred to the Government with the Commission‟s
views.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Copy to:-
1. Sri M. Prakasa Rao, Superintendent, O/o. C.E., TGP, Srikalahasti.
2. Sri M. Laxminarayana,Superintendent,O/o.C.E.,TGP, Srikalahasti
3. Sri K.N. Prasada Rao, Superintendent,O/o.C.E.,TGP, Srikalahasti
4. Sri A. Syama Sundaram,Sr. Assistant,O/o.C.E.,TGP, Srikalahasti
5. The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn. Wing),
I&CAD Dept., Errum Manzil,
Hyderabad.
94
Lr.No.06/59/OMC/B1/2001, dated 31.03.2004

From
Hyderabad.
To
Sri V. Shankaraiah,
S/o. Venkaiah,
H.No.5-19, Fareed pet – 503 123,
Machireddy (Mandal),
Nizamabad District.
Sir,
Sub: One Man Commission (SPF) – Higher Education Department –
Individual representation of Sri V. Shankaraiah - Reg.
Ref: Your representation dated 18-08-2001.
* * *
With reference to your petition cited above, I am to inform you that the
matter has been referred to the Government with Commission‟s views on the
general issue involved in your case.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
95
Lr.No. 06/65/OMC/A2/2001-11, dated 19.04.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
Sri Ranga Sai Butt,
President,
Telangana Employees Ikya Vedika,
Hyderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC (SPF) – I& PR Department – Representation submitted on

violation of SPF and G.O.No. 610 in I & PR Department – Reg.
Ref: Your representations to O.M.C (SPF) dated 04-09-2001 and

30-04-2003.
***
I invite your attention to the references cited and to inform you that your
representations have been examined after obtaining a report from I & P.R.
Department. The Commission‟s views have been communicated to Secretary,
G.A (S& SPF) Department, Secretary, G.A (I & PR) Department and the Director
of I & PR.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
96
Proceedings.No.06/89/OMC (SPF)/B2/2001, dated 06.05.2004
Sub: OMC (SPF) – A.P. Panchayati Raj Subordinate Services - Village

Development Officers, Grade-II– Promotion to the post of Village
Development Officer, Grade-I – Representation of Sri Nori Kama
Sastry – Orders – Issued.
Ref: 1. Representation of Sri Nori Kama Sastry, dt. 14-07-2001.

2. G.O.Ms.No.979, Panchayati Raj (Estt.VI) Dept., dated 08-11-1979.
* * *
Sri Nori Kama Sastry, V.D.O., Buttyagudem Mandal, West Godavari

District represented that in East Godavari and Krishna districts promotions were
given to the Village Development Officers, Grade-II to the post of Village
Development Officer, Grade-I on the basis of the respective district seniorities,
to the vacancies in the district, thus depriving him of his seniority in the
promotion to the post of Extension Officer, Panchayats since his juniors from
other Districts in the Zone stole a march over him.
It appears from the above that the promotions have been based on district
as a unit confining the promotions to district vacancies and on the basis of
district seniority.
Under the Presidential Order the posts of Village Development Officers,

Grade-I and Grade-II fall under the category of Zonal posts under sub-Para 3 of
Para-3. The promotion to a Zonal post i.e., to the post of VDO, Grade-I has to
be confined to the vacancies within the zone and on the basis of Zonal seniority
of the lower post, in this case of the VDO, Grade-II. Hence giving promotions to
the post of VDO, Grade-I district-wise on the basis of district seniorities and for
district vacancies is a contravention of the Presidential Order.
Perhaps this error has occurred because the A.P. Panchayati Raj
Subordinate Service Rules for the posts of Village Development Officers specify
the “District” as “unit of appointment”. “Unit of appointment” is different from

“local area” as contemplated in Para 3 of the Presidential Order. The seniorities
of the V.D.O, Grade-II may be maintained district-wise, but when it comes to
promotions to the post of Village Development Officer, Grade-I, these district-
wise seniorities are to be integrated into a Zonal seniority and promotions given
on the basis of such seniority to the vacancies within the zone. In many
Departments “units of appointment” are discrete parts of a zone but when
promotions are given to Zonal posts, it is the Zonal vacancies that are taken into
account and the seniorities of the various “units of appointment” are integrated
into a single Zonal seniority.
Sd/-
J.M.GIRGLANI
To
The Commissioner of Panchayati Raj & Rural Employment,
Panchayat Raj Bhavan,
Urdu Hall Lane, Himayatnagar, Hyderabad.
Copy to the Prl. Secretary to Government, PR & RD Department,

Copy to the Secretary, G.A (S&SPF) Department, A.P.Secretariat,
Hyderabad.
Copy to Sri Nori Kama Sastry, Village Development Officer,
Buttayagudem Mandal, West Godavari District (A.P)
97
Proceedings No. 06/36/OMC/A2/2001-10, dt. 06-05-2004
Sub: OMC(SPF) – Treasuries & Accounts Department - Representation

from Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, Jr. Accounts Officer, O/o N.C.C.
Directorate on violation of Presidential Orders – Proceedings –
Issued.
Ref:1. From Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, Jr. Accounts Officer, O/o N.C.C.
Directorate, Secunderabad Representation dated 18-09-2001.
2. From the Secretary to Govt. Finance Department,
D.O.Lr.No.3977/295/A2/Admn.1/2001, Dt. 03-09-2001.
3. From the Director, Treasuries and Accounts Department, Hyderabad
Lr.No.B3/12961/2001, dated 08-04-2003 and 10-03-2004.
* * *
Sri Y. Venkata Ramana, Jr. Accounts Officer, O/o N.C.C. Directorate,

Secunderabad in his representation 1st read above has stated that he was
appointed as L.D Accountant through A.P.P.S.C in the Directorate and joined
duty on 23-04-1979. The following individuals were later appointed by transfer
from different districts, on request/on tenure basis, in the Office of the Head of
Department :-
SI.No. Name of the employee Date of Zone of the Emp. &

Joining nature of Transfer
1. Sri P. Krishna 02-11-79 from Ananthapur
Dist., Zone –IV (on
request)
2. Sri C.L. Kantha Rao 20-01-80 from West Godavari
Dist., Zone-II (on
request)
3. Sri S. Prem Kumar 22-07-80 from Karimnagar
Dist., Zone-V (Tenure
basis)
4. Sri P. Basappa 25-07-80 from Prakasam Dist.,
Chowdary. Zone-III. (Tenure
basis)
and Government have permitted their retention in the Head Office from the date
of their joining in the Director of Treasuries and Accounts.
2. Further on a proposal from the Director of Treasuries and Accounts the

Government in their Memo.No.16687/548/Admn.I/Finance Department/83,
Dt.15.12.84 have also permitted the Director of Treasuries and Accounts to fix
the seniority of above (4) individuals, as per their dates of completion of
probation in their respective Branch Offices in the Districts. The Petitioner herein
objected, since their dates of seniority were fixed above him, though he joined
the Office of Director of Treasuries and Accounts on allotment by the APPSC.,
much ahead of their transfers and dates of their joining in H.O.D., Office.
The Commission discussed the issue in detail with the Officials of O/o the
Director of Treasuries and Accounts on 29-04-2004. It was found that the
transfer of the two persons, at SI.Nos. 1 & 2 above, which was done on their
request was „ab initio‟ violative of the Presidential Order. It cannot be considered
under Rule 3 of A.P. Treasuries and Accounts Subordinate Service Special Rules,
as there was „nil‟ panel of vacancies in the year of their transfers to Head Office,
as informed by the Joint Director. So, they have had no „locus standi‟ in the HOD
Office Cadre, because there is no other rule for transfer in their Service Rules
that could save it under Para 5(2) (a) of the Presidential Order.
With regard to the other two persons, at SI.Nos.3&4 above, who have
been brought to the office of HOD on tenure basis, their retention in the HOD
office is also violative of the Presidential Order and the instructions issued in
Para 9(B) of the G.O.P.No.728, G.A.(SPF.A) Department, dated 01-11-1975. An
employee comes on “tenure basis” only for a specified period (i.e. called tenure)
if the Rules provide. Normally 12.5% is provided for tenure posts. They shall
have no right to seniority or promotion in a post where they work on tenure
basis since the Rule 3 of the Subordinate Service Special Rules of the Treasuries
and Accounts Department already provided for filling of “one out of every four
substantive vacancies of L.D. Accountants in Head of the Department with the
L.D. Accountants of Branch Offices”. Hence the retention of those who come
over and above that and on tenure basis is a clear contravention of Presidential
Order as well as the Service Rules.
In the circumstances, the Commission holds that the contention of Sri Y.

Venkata Ramana, Jr. Accounts Officer, O/o. N.C.C Directorate is upheld and the
transfer orders of the four (4) persons i.e. Sri P. Krishna, C.L. Kantha Rao, S.
Prem Kumar and P. Basappa Chowdary are ab initio violative of the Presidential
Order. Consequently, their seniorities have to be counted only in their respective
local cadres and promotions worked out retrospectively, accordingly. The
seniorities in the Head Office will also have to be worked our excluding the
above four (4) persons and promotions also worked out in the H.O.D Office
accordingly.
Sd/-
J.M.GIRGLANI
To
The Director,
Treasuries and Accounts Deptt.

Finance (Admn.) Deptt.
The Secretary to Govt.,

G.A. (Services) Deptt.
Copy to the Petitioner.

98
Proceedings No.11/OMC/PRE-B.2/2003, dated 07.05.2004
Sub: OMC – SPF – Transfer of Work Inspectors in Panchyat Raj

Engineering Department form other Zones to Zone VI – Proceedings
– Issued.
Ref: 1. Representation from the President A.P. Diploma Engineers

Association dated 03-07-2003.
2. From the Engineer-in-Chief (PRED) Lr.No.SIV-FFWP/13163/03,

dated 21-02-04 and 17-03-04.
* * *
The President of the A.P Diploma Engineers Association represented that

five Work Inspectors viz., (1) Smt. K. Durga Rani (2)Smt. S. Padmaja (3)Smt.
Uma Padma (4)Sri. T. Ravi Kumar and (5) Sri. Ch. Adinarayana were transferred
from other Zones to Zone VI in violation of the SPF and now they are claiming
promotions to the posts of A.Es depriving the Zone VI cadres.
The issue has been examined by the Commission in consultation with the
P.R. Department, and the Engineer-in-Chief (PRED). The (i/c) Engineer-in-Chief
(PRED) and Ex-Officio Joint Secretary to Government PR & RD Department
categorically reported that the transfers effected in respect of these Work
Inspectors from other Zones to Zone VI has no sanction of the Government
which is a serious violation of Presidential Order and against all the existing
instructions of the Government.
Workcharged employees in the regular departments came under the

provisions of the Presidential Order from the day Presidential Order came into
effect from 18-10-1975. But the departments, though quite aware of this
position, did not apply these provisions. They do not seem to have made the
appointments/ initial allotments of these employees under Para (4) of the
Presidential Order nor fitted them into local cadres. Since the information given
is only about where they are originally appointed or posted but whether they are
actually locals of those zones is not known and requires verification. The
Department did not also apply Paras 6 and 7 of the Presidential Order to
determine their local status before absorbing them into regular service.
Thus they were treated as if they did not come under the purview of the
Presidential Order. Appointment by redeployment or absorption of the
Workcharged employees and other surplus employees fall under direct
recruitment provisions of Paras 6 and 7 of the Presidential Order. In fact
Workcharged employees fall under Presidential Order
ab initio too.
These Workcharged employees have not only been appointed in disregard

of the Presidential Order and continue to be treated as outside the Presidential
Order, but are being transferred from anywhere to anywhere regardless of their
local status. This results in the seniorities of the other Workcharged employees
being adversely affected apart from the violation of the Presidential Order
already inherent in the system, being further compounded.
In the circumstances this Commission holds that the transfers of these five
Work Inspectors are in violation of the Presidential Order and hence they are to
be repatriated to the Zones in which they are locals.
Sd/-
J.M.GIRGLANI
To
The Engineer-in-Chief,
Panchayati Raj Engineering Department,
Errammanzil,
Hyderabad.
Copy to the Prl. Secretary to Government, Panchayati Raj & Rural

Development Department, A.P Secretariat, Hyderabad.
Copy to the Secretary to Government, General Administration (Ser.)

Copy to Petitioner (Sri. A.V. Bhasker Reddy, President, A.P. Panchayat

Raj Diploma Engineers Association, Ranga Reddy
Dist.)
99
Lr. No.14/OMC/B1/2002, dated 10.05.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
Dr. G. Vijaya Rama Rao, Ex-MLA,
Gajwel Constituency,
288, Balamrai Co-op. Housing Soceity,
Mahendra Hills,
Secunderabad.
Sir,
Sub: OMC – SPF – Appointment / Transfers – Violation of Rules in respect
of Jr. Assistants and Sr. Assistants – Reg.
Ref: 1. Representation from Dr. G. Vijaya Rama Rao, EX-MLA, Gajwel

Constituency, Medak dated nil.
2. From the Director of Collegiate Education
Lr.Rc.No.2014/OP I-1/2001, dt.25-02-2003.
3. From the RJD of Collegiate Education (FAC), Warangal Lr.No.
2079/A1/B1/2002, dt. 24-06-2003 addressed to Director of
Collegiate Education, Hyderabad and copied to One Man
Commission (SPF).
4. OMC (SPF) Lr.No. 14/OMC/B1/2002, dated 23.07.2003.
5. OMC (SPF) Lr.No. 14/OMC/B1/2002, dated 09.02.2004 addressed
to the Director of Collegiate Education and copied to the Secretary
to Government G.A. (SPF) Department.
6. From the RJD of Collegiate Education, Warangal Rc.No.505/A2/04,
dated 19.03.2004.
* * *
With reference to representation 1st cited, I inform you that the matter
was examined in consultation with the District Collector, Warangal, Director of
Collegiate Education and Officials of Regional Joint Director of Collegiate
Education, Warangal.
On going through the individuals‟ service particulars it came to light that

the appointments referred to by you were made by the Regional Joint Director of
Collegiate Education, Warangal on compassionate grounds on the allotments,
made by the respective District Collectors (Nodal Authority) as per the Rules in
force.
Regarding the point of transfers referred to therein, the Commission has

informed the General Administration Department to take necessary action on the
violation of Presidential Order that has occurred in the process.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
100
ONE MAN COMMISION (SPF)
Proceedings No. 11/OMC/SPF/MEDAK/2/2003, dated 10.05.2004
Sub: OMC – SPF – Implementation of G.O.Ms.No.610 – Representation

against Smt. N. Anasuya Bai, M.P.D.O., Kohir Mandal, Medak District
– Proceedings Issued - Reg.
Ref:1. Representation from Sri Satyanarayana, Teacher, Kohir Mandal,

Medak District, dated Nil.
2. From the Commissioner of Panchayati Raj and Rural Employment
Lr.No.22661/CPR & RE/A3/2001, dt. 21.03.2003.
* * *
A representation has been received from Sri Satyanarayana, Teacher,

Kohir Mandal, Medak District against Smt. N. Anasuya Bai, MPDO, Kohir Mandal,
Medak District. The Petitioner has contended that according to G.O.Ms.No.610,
(meaning thereby, Presidential Order) the post of MPDO is to be allotted to
Telangana Employee and requested for transfer of Smt. N. Anasuya Bai to her
native District Guntur in the light of the Six Point Formula.
The Commission posted the case for Hearing on 05.05.2004 with the
Petitioner, the Respondent and the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad or his
representative and the concerned Officials of the CPR & RE office.
Additional Commissioner, Panchayat Raj, the respondent Smt. N. Anasuya

Bai, MPDO and the representative of Zilla Parishad, Medak were present. The
point on the local status of Smt. N. Anasuya Bai, according to Presidential Order
was verified from the Residential Certificate issued by the M.R.O., Charminar,
Hyderabad District, which confirmed her local status. Smt. N. Anasuya Bai is a
local of Hyderabad District – Zone-VI. She has passed B.A. from Open University
and had had no formal School Education. Hence Residential Certificate was the
proper document for the purpose under Para 7 (a) (ii) of the Presidential Order.
MPDO is a Multi Zonal post. The respondent is promoted and allotted

under 20% quota as MPDO in 1996 fixed for Supervisor, ICDS, Women Welfare
Department (for which she was recruited and allotted by the APPSC) and posted
to Manoor Mandal of Medak District. Subsequently she was transferred to Kohir
Mandal as MPDO and is working there since 1998 onwards. Medak District is in
Zone-VI.
The Commission holds that the allegation in the representation cited is far
from truth and the contentions of the Petitioner are not found valid, since Smt.
N. Anasuya Bai is a local of Zone-VI as per the Presidential Order.
It is therefore felt that there is no point for this Commission to interfere in

the matter.
Sd/-
To
The Commissioner of Panchayati Raj & Rural Employment,
Panchayati Raj Bhavan,
Urdu Hall Lane,
Himayatnagar,
Hyderabad.
Copy to:- The Secretary to Government (Services), General Administration

Copy to:- The Prl. Secretary to Government, PR & RD Department,

Copy to:- The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Medak District at
Sangareddy.
Copy to:- Smt. N. Anasuya Bai, MPDO, Kohir Mandal, Medak District.
101
Lr. No.11/OMC/B1/S.E/2004, dated 10.05.2004
From
Hyderabad.
To
Sri P.N. Murthy,
Retd. Principal,
2-2-1136/3/1,
302, Jayalakshmi Nivas,
New Nallakunta,
Hydeabad – 500 044.
Sir,
Sub: OMC – SPF – Violation of Six Point Formula in S.C.E.R.T. – Reg.
Ref: Your representation dated 04.03.2004.
* * *
With reference to your representation cited above, I am to inform

you that the matter has been referred to the Government with Commission‟s
views there on, as the Commission has found your grievance to be genuine in
principle.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-

ONE MAN COMMISSION-SIX POINT FORMULA-ANDHRA PRADESH-HEADED BY Mr. J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.) Vol III

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ONE MAN COMMISSION-SIX POINT FORMULA-ANDHRA PRADESH-HEADED BY Mr. J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.) Vol III

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ONE MAN COMMISSION-SIX POINT FORMULA-ANDHRA PRADESH-HEADED BY Mr. J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.) Vol III

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

ONE MAN COMMISSION

J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.)

(IN THREE VOLUMES)

CONTAINING PART-2 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (SPF) DEPARTMENT

PREFACE TO FINAL REPORT PART – 2

Final Report PART-2 on Implementation of the Presidential Order in

Immediately after the first extension of the Commission from 01-10-

I am again grateful to the Government for reposing confidence in

Hyderabad J.M. GIRGLANI, IAS (Retd.)

Subject Page Nos.

Preface to Final Report Part – 2 2–3

Appendices related to Part-2 37-99

Proceedings related to Part-2 103-169

FINAL REPORT PART- 2 ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE

FROM 01-10-2003 TO 10-05-2004

16.1.0 In Part-1 of this Report which appears in Volume - I there are 15

HEADS OF DEPARTMENTS (HODs)

classified as Head of Department offices have been treated as Head of

percentage of 80 and 70 respectively. Normally in the free percentage

Remedial Action (III-A)

Deviation Genre No. IV

Remedial Action (XIV-A)

URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES

16.4.0 Finding No.44-A In connection with the Finding No.44 in SECTION-A,

UNIT OF APPOINTMENT/LOCAL CADRE

Deviation Genre No. VI

16.5.1 Under the Presidential Order dt.18.10.1975 the posts of Village

Remedial Action (XX-A)

CROSS CADRE MOVEMENT

Deviation Genre No. VII

16.7.0 Finding No.48-B Subsequent to this initial violation in appointment,

Remedial Action (XXI-A)

16.8.2 The case of all Part-Time Junior Lectures regularized or yet to be

16.9.1 The Commission‟s D.O. Letter on the matter is at Appendix XXI.

Remedial Action (XXI-B)

16.10.0 Finding No.51-B A case has come to notice in the department of

Remedial Action (XXI–C)

Deputations And Fair Share Principle

Deviation Genre No. VIII

16.11.0 In addition to what is given in the SECTION-A, PART-1 of Final Report, it

16.12.0 Finding No.68-A In the Department of Information and Public

Similarly the following posts were sanctioned, but actually the

S.No. Name of the Sanctioned Posts Excess

This matter has already been reported to the Government in G.A.(SPF)

16.13.0 Finding No. 68-B In the Cooperative Department there are no

course, it is also violative of the Service Rules, Fundamental Rules

The matter has already been referred to the Secretary to Government,

Remedial Action (XXII-A)

ON OTHER DUTY (OD)

Deviation Genre No. IX

as post to which the persons in that category of posts can be appointed

16.14.4 The Commission‟s letter to the Government in this regard is at

Remedial Action (XXIII-A)

16.15.0 Finding No.73 – B In our Finding No.73 in SECTION-A, PART-1 of

manning the Division would have been direct recruitment and

Remedial Action (XXIII-B)

16.15.5 The Commission‟s letter addressed to Government in this regard is at