Paragraph numbers below are the court’s original numbering, recovered from the source text.
10. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, it is necessary to consider Section 77 as well as Section 82 of the Act. Examination of the scope and ambit of these provisions sufficiently indicates the correct answer to the question arising for consideration. The provisions are extracted herein: “Section 77. Provisions relating to other services.— (1) Every person who immediately before the appointed day is serving on substantive basis in connection with the affairs of the existing State of Andhra Pradesh shall, on and from that day provisionally continue to serve in connection with the affairs of the State of Andhra Pradesh 82 unless he is required, by general or special order of the Central Government to serve provisionally in connection with the affairs of the State of Telangana: Provided that every direction under this sub-section issued after the expiry of a period of one year from the appointed day shall be issued with the consultation of the Governments of the successor States. (2) As soon as may be after the appointed day, the Central Government shall, by general or special order, determine the successor State to which every person referred to in sub-section (1) shall be finally allotted for service, after consideration of option received by seeking option from the employees, and the date with effect from which such allotment shall take effect or be deemed to have taken effect: Provided that even after the allocation has been made, the Central Government may, in order to meet any deficiency in the service, depute officers of other State services from one successor State to the other: Provided further that as far as local, district, zonal and multi-zonal cadres are concerned, the employees shall continue to serve, on or after the appointed day, in that cadre: Provided also that the employees of local, district, zonal and multi-zonal cadres which fall entirely in one of the successor States, shall be deemed to be allotted to that successor State: Provided also that if a particular zone or multi-zone falls in both the successor States, then the employees of such zonal or multi-zonal cadre shall be finally allotted to one or the other successor States in terms of the provisions of this sub-section. (3) Every person who is finally allotted under the provisions of sub-section (2) to a successor State shall, if he is not already serving therein, be made available for serving in the successor State from such date as may be agreed [2024] 9 S.C.R. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation & Ors. v. V.V. Brahma Reddy & Anr. upon between the Governments of the successor States or, in default of such agreement, as may be determined by the Central Government: Provided that the Central Government shall have the power to review any of its orders issued under this section. Section 82. Provision for employees of Public Sector Undertakings, etc.—On and from the appointed day, the employees of State Public Sector Undertakings, corporations and other autonomous bodies shall continue to function in such undertaking, corporation or autonomous bodies for a period of one year and during this period the corporate body concerned shall determine the modalities for distributing the personnel between the two successor States.” (emphasis supplied)
11. From the text of these provisions, it is evident that Section 77 applies to state government employees. Section 82 clearly states that the Corporations shall determine the modalities for distributing their employees between the successor states. Pursuant to this, the Board prepared the Agenda Note dated 16.08.2017 that sets out the allocation of various kinds of employees between APSRTC and TSRTC. Upon going through the Agenda Note, we find that the Board has decided that Class III and Class IV employees, who are appointed at the regional level, are to be allocated to the Corporation in which the region falls after bifurcation. We are extracting the relevant portion here: “Regional Level Recruitments: The Class III and IV cadres like Drivers, Conductors, Mechanics, Artisans, etc., are recruited at Regional Level i.e., Revenue District wise. There are 12 regions in 13 revenue districts of residual AP state since Srikakulam and Vizianagaram districts are considered as North East Coast Region. There were 10 districts in Telangana area prior to the appointed day i.e., on 02.06.2014. the seniority of these posts is also maintained at Regional level. The presidential order of making recruitment in the ratio of 80% of the posts to local 84 district candidates and 20% to non (illegible) candidates is followed in such recruitments. Since the recruitments and seniority levels are at regional level, the distribution of these employees between two entities i.e., in 67,868 posts in residual APSRTC and 61,864 to TSRTC should not be an issue as they were recruited at Regional level (local cadre) and belong to the respective successor state/corporation in which the region falls after bifurcation irrespective of their place of birth or domicile or schooling etc.” (emphasis supplied)
12. There is no dispute about the fact that the respondents were recruited at the regional level and belong to the successor state Corporation in which the region falls.
13. In this view of the matter, following the statutory mandate of Section 82 read with the Agenda Note dated 16.08.2017, the respondents will continue their employment in the same region, which is under the present TSRTC.
14. The High Court has incorrectly relied on Section 77 of the Act and has in fact failed to notice Section 82 and the follow-up action taken thereunder. The High Court also ignored the correct enunciation of the applicable law in the order dated 18.04.2018, whereunder the respondents were directed to report at their parental zones as per the guidelines. As there is no dispute about the applicability of Section 82 even at the bar, the submission of Mr. G.V.R. Choudary that the modalities for allocation have not been decided cannot be accepted in light of the Agenda Note dated 16.08.2017.
15. We have also gone through the prayer in the writ petition of Mr. V.V. Brahma Reddy (respondent no. 1 in Civil Appeal No. 5267/2024), under which there is no challenge to the Agenda Note and its approval. The division bench of the High Court failed to note that the respondents who were on deputation were not absorbed in the deputed posts. In fact, their seniority is continued in their parental zones.
16. The High Court also did not consider the subsequent development when the respondents were in fact repatriated to their parent cadre as a consequence of the order passed by the division bench on 18.04.2018. It is for this reason that this Court had, at the stage of [2024] 9 S.C.R. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation & Ors. v. V.V. Brahma Reddy & Anr. admission, stayed the judgment of the division bench on 05.10.2020, which stay is continuing till date. The consequence is that the respondents have returned to this parent cadre in the State of Telangana.
17. For the reasons as indicated hereinabove, the decision of the division bench is unsustainable. We therefore, allow Civil Appeal Nos. 5267, 5268, 5269, 5270, 5271, 5272, 5273, 5274, 5275, 5276, 5277, 5278, 5279, 5280, 5281, 5282, 5283, 5284, 5285, 5286, 5287, 5288, 5289, 5290 and 5291 of 2024 and set aside the judgment and order passed by the High Court in Writ Appeal Nos. 260, 290, 291, 292, 303, 304, 306, 311, 312, 313, 318, 320, 321, 322, 323, 325, 328, 329, 354, 355, 356, 360, 386, 389 and 568 of 2018 dated 21.11.2019 and dismiss the Writ Petition Nos. 25880, 25881, 25886, 25196, 25198, 25201, 25214, 24825, 24849, 24870, 24872, 24874, 24891, 24941, 24987, 25139, 25170, 24605, 24609, 24690, 24697, 24723, 24773, 489 and 6065 of 2017 dated 10.11.2017.
18. There shall be no order as to costs. Result of the case: Matters disposed of. †Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan