Y. Sai Satya Prasad & Ors. Versus D. Prabhakara Rao & Ors.
Y. Sai Satya Prasad & Ors. Versus D. Prabhakara Rao & Ors.
Landmark Cases of India / सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
INHERENT JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) D.No.28852 of 2020
Y. Sai Satya Prasad & Ors. …Petitioner(s)
Versus
D. Prabhakara Rao & Ors. …Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
M. R. Shah, J.
1.0. Present contempt petition has been preferred by the 84
petitioners – erstwhile employees of the Andhra
Pradesh Power Utilities alleging deliberate and willful
disobedience of the judgment and order passed by this
Court dated 7.12.2020 in MA No.1270 of 2020 in Civil
Appeal No.11435 of 2018 and other allied
Miscellaneous Applications in the case of Telangana
Page 1 of 54
Power Generation Corporation Limited vs. Andhra
Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited
reported in 2020 SCC Online SC 995 noncompliance
alleged against the Telangana Power Utilities
(hereinafter referred to as the “TS Power Utilities”).
2.0. Shri Huzefa Aziz Ahmadi learned Senior Advocate has
appeared on behalf of the applicants, Shri Ranjit
Kumar and Shri V Giri, learned Senior Advocates have
appeared on behalf of alleged contemnors – Telangana
Power Utilities and Shri Niraj Kishan Kaul, learned
Senior Advocate has appeared on behalf of the
respondent Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities.
3.0. Shri Ahmadi, learned Senior Advocate appearing on
behalf of the applicants has vehemently submitted
that by detailed judgment and orders dated
20.06.2020 and 7.12.2020 this Hon’ble Court accepted
the report submitted by the One Man Committee of
Hon’ble Mr. Justice D M Dharmadhikari. It is
submitted that by an order dated 7.12.2020 this Court
had accepted the Concluding Report of the One Man
Page 2 of 54
Committee and has directed the respondents to
implement and absorb all the employees allocated to
TS Power Utilities. However, TS Power Utilities have
arbitrarily and unilaterally left out the petitioners
contrary to the judgment dated 7.12.2020.
3.1. It is submitted by Shri Ahmadi that a perusal of the
judgment and order dated 7.12.2020 passed by this
Court would show that the objections of TS Power
Utilities, with regard to the excess allocation and also
with regard to the reciprocity, in respect of 655
numbers, were categorically rejected and the final list
appended to the Concluding Report has been expressly
affirmed. It is submitted that as such there was an
express direction to the power utilities of both the
States and all concerned to implement the report of
One Man Committee.
3.2. It is further submitted by Shri Ahmadi learned Senior
Advocate that a perusal of the Concluding Report of
the One Man Committee makes it explicit that both the
Power Utilities have to absorb 655 employees each as
Page 3 of 54
per Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020. It is
submitted that this figure of 655 has also been
reiterated by this Court in the subsequent judgment
and order dated 7.12.2020. It is submitted that in the
operative directions in the Concluding Report, it has
expressly been stated that allocation made is final and
binding both on the employer and employees; and
failure to implement the same may be reported to the
Supreme Court for remedial or punitive action. It is
submitted that the only exception carved out in the
said directions was with regard to those employees
who have attained the age of 58 years in the year
2020, who will be kept out of the allocation process. It
is submitted that none of the petitioners have attained
the age of 58 years in the year 2020.
3.3. It is submitted that all the 84 petitioners figured in the
final list prepared by the One Man Committee. The
names of the petitioners were duly mentioned in the
said list, which was prepared utilities wise by the One
Man Committee. It is submitted that as per the final
Page 4 of 54
list 28 petitioners had to be absorbed in TS Genco, 35
members had to be absorbed in TS Transco, similarly
21 petitioners had to be absorbed in TS Discoms.
3.4. It is submitted that pursuant to the passing of the
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 by the One Man
Committee, Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities have
implemented the directions in toto, as per the final list
annexed to the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020
prepared by the One Man Committee.
3.5. It is submitted that on one hand, the Andhra Pradesh
Power Utilities, while implementing the directions have
relived the applicants, however TS Power Utilities have
not absorbed the petitioners, which action is in teeth
of directions issued by this Court accepting One Man
Committee report of Hon’ble Mr. Justice D M
Dharmadhikari.
3.6. It is submitted that the petitioners herein ought not
have been dropped by TS Power Utilities in terms of
the judgment dated 7.12.2020 because; (I) apparently
Page 5 of 54
the names of the petitioners are part of the Concluding
Report dated 20.06.2020 and allocation list of
Direction Nos.II and III ; (II) none of the petitioners had
attained the age of 58 years in the year 2020 and thus
are outside the scope and ambit of Direction No.I; (III)
the relieving orders issued by the Andhra Pradesh
Utilities to petitioners upon being allocated to TS
Utilities dated 20.06.2020 in terms of Concluding
Report dated 20.06.2020 are upheld and said
allocation has become final in terms of the judgment
dated 7.12.2020; (IV) That TS Power Utilities have
truncated the entire allocation by indulging into reallocation of retired employees. The lists annexed to
office order have two lists, one of (Employee absorbed),
second list comprises of those employees who were
allocated by One Man Committee to corresponding
Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities and they got expired or
have attained the age of 58 years. It is submitted that
said second list is appended only to cause confusion
and none of the employees in the second list are part
of the final lists of TS Genco, TS Transco, TSSPDCL or
Page 6 of 54
TSNPDCL as per the Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020 r/w compliance report dated 26.06.2020.
3.7. It is further submitted by Shri Ahmadi learned Senior
Advocate that despite express directions from this
Court read with directions of Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020, the respondent contemnors TS Power
Utilities are in willful disobedience in not having
implemented the allocation made by the One Man
Committee as per the final list, leaving the petitioners,
who were to be absorbed in the power utilities of the
Telangana State high and dry. It is submitted that
noncompliance is borne out by the following:
(I). That the office order dated 17.12.2020 issued by the
TS Genco which is contrary to the report of the One
Man Committee accepted by this Court;
A. that as per report of the One Man Committee, TS
Genco was to absorb 300 employees in total, from AP
Genco;
B. that since TS Genco has already admitted 26
employees in terms of Supplementary Report dated
Page 7 of 54
11.03.2020, the total employees to be admitted by TS
Genco ought to be 300 as per the judgment dated
7.12.2020;
C. that however, TS Genco has reduced this number of
226 employees and resultantly 28 petitioners are
dropped their allocation to TS Genco held to be
absolute and all 28 petitioners have not attained the
age of 58 years and thus are outside the purview of
direction. It is submitted that this is contrary to the
judgment of this Court, the direction no. I stipulates to
exclude retired persons from TS Genco allocation list
annexed to Concluding Report and none of the
petitioners are retired in terms of Direction No.I;
D. that therefore, TS Genco have devised the office order
to circumvent the orders of this Court with jugglery of
the numbers and truncating the allocation lists and
contemnors are guilty of dropping 28 petitioners, as a
result of willful disobedience of the order of this Court;
E. that the list of employees absorbed does not include
the 28 petitioners who were already included in the
final list of the One Man Committee. It is submitted
Page 8 of 54
that the said lists annexed to office order are prepared
to confuse the tally of allocation lists and to suppress
the fact that TS Genco has absorbed only 226 (out of
300), a list of 252(226 + 26) has been appended to
office order to mislead this Court by repeating the
same 26 employees who were already admitted on
11.03.2020 vide Supplementary Report of One Man
Committee. It is submitted that further a list of 48
employees is appended, these are employees who were
never part of 300 employees allocated to TS Genco and
the list is fraudulently appended, just to display and
match the numbers.
3.8. It is further submitted that similarly office order dated
18.12.2020 issued by the TS Transco is nothing but a
willful disobedience of the judgment and order passed
by this Court dated 20.06.2020 and 7.12.2020
accepting the report of the One Man Committee. It is
submitted that as per the Concluding Report, TS
Transco was to absorb 173 employees from AP
Transco. It is submitted that since TS Transco had
Page 9 of 54
already admitted 30 employees in terms of
Supplementary Report dated 11.03.2020, the total
employees to be admitted by TS Transco ought to be as
per the judgment dated 7.12.2020. It is submitted that
however, TS Transco has reduced this number to 104
employees and resultantly 35 petitioners are dropped
despite their allocation to TS Transco held to be
absolute and all 35 petitioners have not attained the
age of 58 years and thus are outside the purview of
Direction I. It is submitted that this is contrary to the
judgment of this Court, the Direction No.I only
stipulates to exclude Retired persons from TS Transco
list annexed to Concluding Report and none of the
petitioners are retired in terms of Direction No. I. It is
submitted that TS Transco issued office order
audaciously ignoring the allocation made under
Direction No.II & III as approved by this Court. It is
submitted that therefore, TS Transco have devised the
office order to circumvent the orders of this Court with
jugglery of the numbers and truncating the allocation
lists and contemnors are guilty of dropping 35
Page 10 of 54
petitioners as a result of willful disobedience of the
order of this Court. It is submitted that the list of
employees absorbed does not include the 35
petitioners who were already included in the final list
of the One Man Committee. The said lists annexed to
office order are prepared to confuse the tally of
allocation lists and suppress the fact that TS Transco
has absorbed only 104 (out of (173 +8), a list of 134
(104 +30) has been appended to office order to mislead
this Court by repeating the same 30 employees who
were already admitted on 11.03.2020 vide
Supplementary Report of One Man Committee. It is
further submitted that the employees who were never
part of 173 employees allocated just to TS Transco and
the list is fraudulently appended to display and match
the number.
3.9. It is further submitted that even the office order dated
18.12.2020 issued by the TSNPDCL would also
tantamount to contempt and willful disobedience of
the judgment and order passed by this Court. It is
Page 11 of 54
submitted that as per the Concluding Report,
TSSPDCL was to absorb 113 employees from
APSPDCL. It is submitted that since TSSPDCL had
already admitted 15 employees in terms of
Supplementary Report dated 11.03.2020, the total
employees to be admitted by TASSPDCL ought to be
(113+2) as per the judgment dated 07.12.2020. It is
submitted that however, TSSPDCL has reduced this
number to 66 employees and resultantly 20 petitioners
are dropped despite their allocation to TSSPDCL held
to be absolute and all 20 petitioners have not attained
age of 58 years and thus are outside the purview of
Direction I. It is submitted that this is contrary to the
judgment of this Court, the Direction No.I only
stipulates to exclude Retired persons from TSSPDCL
Allocation list annexed to the Concluding Report and
none of the petitioners are retired in terms of Direction
No.I. It is submitted that TSSPDCL issued office order
audaciously ignoring the allocation made under
Direction Nos. II & III as approved by this Court. It is
submitted that therefore, TSSPDCL have devised the
Page 12 of 54
office order to circumvent the orders of this Court with
jugglery of the numbers and truncating the allocation
lists and contemnors are guilty of dropping 20
petitioners as a result of willful disobedience of the
order of this Court. It is submitted that the list of
employees absorbed does not include the 20
petitioners who were already included in the final list
of the One Man Committee. The said lists annexed to
office order are prepared to confuse the tally of
allocation lists and suppress the fact that TSSPDCL
has absorbed only 66 (out of (113 +2), a list of 81 (66
+15) has been appended to office order to mislead this
Court by repeating the same 15 employees who were
already admitted on 11.03.2020 vide Supplementary
Report of One Man Committee. It is further submitted
that the employees who were never part of 113
employees allocated just to TSSPDCL and the list is
fraudulently appended to display and match the
number.
3.10.It is further submitted by Shri Ahmadi learned Senior
Page 13 of 54
Advocate that the office order dated 19.12.2020 issued
by the TSNPDCL is also in teeth of the judgment and
order passed by this Court. It is submitted that as per
the Concluding Report, TSNPDCL was to absorb 69
employees from APLPDCL & APSPDCL. It is submitted
that since TSNPDCL, the net employees to be admitted
by TSSPDCL ought to be 69 as per the judgment dated
07.12.2020. It is submitted that however, TSNPDCL
has reduced this number to 60 employees and
resultantly petitioner no.83 is dropped despite their
allocation to TSNPDCL held to be absolute and the
said single petitioner has not attained age of 58 years
and thus are outside the purview of Direction I. It is
submitted that this is contrary to the judgment of this
Court, the Direction No.I only stipulates to exclude
Retired persons from TSNPDCL Allocation list annexed
to the Concluding Report and petitioner no.83 is not
retired in terms of Direction No.I. It is submitted that
therefore, TSNPDCL have devised the office order to
circumvent the orders of this Court with jugglery of the
numbers and truncating the allocation lists and
Page 14 of 54
contemnors are guilty of dropping 1 petitioner as a
result of willful disobedience of the order of this Court.
It is submitted that the list of employees absorbed
does not include the petitioner no.83 who was already
included in the final list of the One Man Committee.
The said lists annexed to office order are prepared to
confuse the tally of allocation lists and suppress the
fact that TSNPDCL has absorbed only 60 (out of 69),
but a list 65 has been appended to office order to
mislead this Court. It is further submitted that the
employees who were never part of 69 employees
allocated just to TSNPDCL and the list is fraudulently
appended to display and match the number.
3.11.It is submitted that from the above, it is apparent that
TS Power Utilities have not implemented the judgment
dated 7.12.2020 passed by this Court. It is submitted
that after confirmation of the Concluding Report of the
One Man Committee and allocation lists, this was only
a mechanical exercise of admission of the employees
based on the lists, but TS Power Utilities have
Page 15 of 54
reopened the entire lists and indulged in unilateral
pick and choose.
3.12.It is submitted that in terms of direction VI of the One
Man Committee, the petitioners are to be given posting
and joining orders. It is submitted that the direction
issued is followed by Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities,
but Telangana Power Utilities have unilaterally altered
the allocation lists and have denied posting and joining
orders of 84 petitioners.
Making above submissions, it is prayed to punish the
respondent/ contemnors Telangana Power Utilities for
deliberate and willful disobedience of the orders
passed by this Court dated 20.06.2020 and 7.12.2020
and not acting as per the Concluding Report of the
One Man Committee.
4.0. Shri Ranjit Kumar and Shri V Giri, learned Senior
Advocates have appeared on behalf of alleged
contemnors – Telangana Power Utilities. It is
vehemently submitted by learned counsel for the TS
Power Utilities that vide order dated 28.11.2019 this
Page 16 of 54
Court constituted One Man Committee headed by
Justice D M Dharmadhikari (Retd.) to frame the
modalities and finalize the allocation of employees
between the Power Utilities of Telangana and Andhra
Pradesh. One Man Committee determined the
modalities and submitted final report dated
26.12.2019 allocating 655 employees out of 1157
employees from TS power Utilities to Andhra Pradesh
Power Utilities while retaining 502 employees in TS
Power Utilities, as per the opinion given by them. That
aggrieved by the final report dated 26.12.2019, the
Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities filed Miscellaneous
Application Nos.60, 61 and 62 of 2019 in Civil Appeal
No. 11435 of 2019. That this Court by an order dated
24.1.2020 directed the Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities
to make a representation and same was to be
considered by the One Man Committee and take
appropriate decision.
4.1. It is submitted that in terms of the direction of this
Court, an application was made by Andhra Pradesh
Page 17 of 54
Power Utilities on 3.2.2020 before the One Man
Committee and the TS Power Utilities were submitted
their objections. That during the hearing before the
One Man Committee, TS Power Utilities agreed to
accommodate 71 employees from Andhra Pradesh
Power Utilities to TS Power Utilities on spouse and
medical grounds. That the One Man Committee vide
supplementary report dated 11.3.2020 allocated 71
employees from Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities to TS
Power Utilities on spouse and medical grounds etc.
and directed the Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities to
identify remaining 584 employees (65571 = 584) for
allocation from Andhra Pradesh to Telangana, since
Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities had accepted 655
employees allocated by TS Power Utilities. Accordingly,
the TS Power Utilities issued posting orders to 71
employees allocated by Supplementary Report dated
11.3.2020. That thereafter Andhra Pradesh Power
Utilities submitted a report of 584 employees allocable
from Andhra Pradesh to Telangana vide their letter
dated 12.3.2020. Aggrieved by the letter dated
Page 18 of 54
12.03.2020 of Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities, a
representation was made by TS Power Utilities to the
One Man Committee to reconsider the list submitted
by Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities being contrary to
modalities. It is submitted that at that stage, One Man
Committee filed an application in MA No.915 of 2020
in MA No.60 of 2020 for payment of salaries pending
consideration of objections made by the TS Power
Utilities. The same came to be allowed by order dated
8.4.2020. It is submitted that thereafter this Court in
Application made by the TS Power Utilities, by an
order dated 1.5.2020 observed that One Man
Committee shall take up the objections and take a
decision at an early date after hearing all the affected
persons and further directed to take steps for payment
of salaries to the effected employees within a period of
one week. Accordingly, TS Power Utilities have paid
salaries to 584 employees who are figuring in the list
dated 12.3.2020 communicated by the Andhra
Pradesh Power Utilities to the One Man Committee.
Page 19 of 54
It is submitted that One Man Committee vide
instructions dated 11.5.2020 directed the Andhra
Pradesh Power Utilities to send their proposed revised
list limited to 584 employees, duly taking into
consideration the representations received from the
employees. It is submitted that Andhra Pradesh Power
Utilities vide letter dated 26.5.2020 submitted a
revised list of 655 employees allocable from Andhra
Pradesh to TS Power Utilities on the principle of
reciprocity. It is submitted that said list includes 71
employees already allocated vide supplementary report
dated 11.3.2020 and working TS Power Utilities as on
that date.
4.2. It is submitted that thereafter One Man Committee by
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 annexed the
revised list dated 26.5.2020 furnished by the Andhra
Pradesh and gave further directions. It is further
submitted that One Man Committee held that the
allocation of 655 employees from Telangana and
Andhra Pradesh is concluded. It further observed that
Page 20 of 54
at para 28 that allocation list, company wise, post wise
prepared by the Andhra Pradesh for allocation from
Andhra Pradesh to Telangana is approved and in para
no.29 suggested the list annexed to concluding report
to be modified in terms of the directions contained
therein. It is submitted that direction No.I of para
No.29 specifies that the retired employees who
attained or will be attaining 58 years of age in the year
2020 can be kept out of the allocation process and
their names in the allocation lists are to be removed. It
is submitted that direction no. II specifies that the
SubCommittee Member, Andhra Pradesh may reexamine left out spouse and medical cases and every
attempt should be made to accommodate them in the
State of their option. It is submitted that direction
no.III specifies that all SC/ST employees cases be reexamined to accommodate them as per Modality VII in
the State where they are notified as SCs and STs so as
not to affect their future service growth.
4.3. It is submitted that on the implementation of the
Page 21 of 54
Direction No.I of para 29 of the Concluding Report, the
TS Power Utilities have identified 123 employees who
are to be removed from the allocated list of 655
employees from Telangana State to Andhra Pradesh.
Accordingly, allocated employees from Telangana State
to Andhra Pradesh is reduced from 655 to 532 (655
123). It is submitted that therefore, correspondingly
532 members are to be allocated from Andhra Pradesh
to Telangana State. It is submitted that out of 532
allocable employees, 71 employees have already joined
and working in TS Power Utilities in terms of the
Supplementary Report dated 11.3.2020. Accordingly,
equal number of employees i.e. 123 members were
removed from the list of allocable employees from
Andhra Pradesh to Telangana State on the principle of
Reciprocity and Financial Neutrality. It is submitted
that in the process of removing 123 members, the 71
employees already allocated have not been disturbed.
Accordingly, 456 employees are allocable from Andhra
Pradesh to Telangana State. In respect of two
employees allocable from Andhra Pradesh to
Page 22 of 54
Telangana State, a clarification has been sought for,
from the Andhra Pradesh.
4.4. It is submitted that thus the TS Power Utilities have
implemented the judgment dated 7.12.2020 and
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 of the One Man
Committee in its true spirit. It is submitted that thus,
the excess employees relieved from Andhra Pradesh to
Telangana State are 83 (615532=83).
4.5. It is submitted that in the process of allocation of
employees, One Man Committee has allocated 71
employees working in Andhra Pradesh to Telangana
State on spouse and medical grounds. They were
treated as part of allocable employees in reciprocation
of 655 already allocated to Andhra Pradesh vide Final
Report dated 26.12.2019. It is submitted that
therefore, Andhra Pradesh was directed to identify
remaining 584 (65571) vide the Supplementary
Report dated 11.3.2020.
4.6. It is submitted that on implementation of the Direction
Page 23 of 54
No. II of Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020, the
same procedure is to be followed by the Andhra
Pradesh whereas Andhra Pradesh vide letter dated
26.8.2020 identified 10 employees, who are shown
over and above allocable 655 employees, which is just
contrary to the reports of the One Man Committee. It is
further submitted that it is open for the Andhra
Pradesh to adjust the said employees within the
Reciprocation ratio and in proportion to allocated
employees from Telangana State to Andhra Pradesh.
4.7. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Telangana
State Power Utilities that entire allocation process
undertaken by the One Man Committee is on the
principle of reciprocity and the same was reiterated in
para no.21 of the Concluding Report. It is submitted
that since 655 employees are already allocated vide
Final Report dated 26.12.2019 from Telangana to
Andhra Pradesh, equal number were allocable from
Andhra Pradesh to Telangana State. It is submitted
that the One Man Committee had taking into
Page 24 of 54
consideration of 71 employees already allocated,
directed the Andhra Pradesh to furnish a list of 584
employees and the same were included as Annexure to
the Concluding Report. In the process of
implementation of Directions of Concluding Report
dated 20.06.2020, 123 employees are deleted by
Telangana State. It is submitted that therefore, the
allocable employees from Andhra Pradesh to
Telangana State shall also stand reduced from 655 to
532 (655123=532). It is submitted that further 10
employees allocated under Direction No.II are to be
accommodated within 532 including 71 employees
already allocated. However, the Andhra Pradesh has
not undertaken any exercise thereby leading to
retention of 83 employees allocable from Andhra
Pradesh to Telangana State, which lead to the present
situation. It is submitted that instead of rectifying the
same, Andhra Pradesh is seeking to justify their stand
by filing intervention petition, which is unjustified.
4.8. It is further submitted that the principle of reciprocity
Page 25 of 54
has been approved by this Court in its judgment dated
7.12.2020 (para 26, 41 & 42). It is submitted that this
Court has further observed that the implementation of
the direction cannot be termed as modification of the
Concluding Report and both the Power Utilities were
directed to implement the same. It is submitted that
thus there is no violation on the part of the TS Power
Utilities in the implementation of the orders dated
7.12.2020.
Making above submissions, it is prayed to
dismiss the present contempt petition and to direct
Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities to retain the
corresponding 83 employees deleted from the list of
employees allocable from Andhra Pradesh to
Telangana duly adhering to the principle of reciprocity
and financial neutrality.
5.0. Shri Niraj Kishan Kaul, learned Senior Advocate
appearing on behalf of the intervenors Andhra
Pradesh Power Utilities has submitted that the
respective alleged contemnors have committed
Page 26 of 54
apparent contempt of the judgment and order passed
by this Court dated 7.12.2020.
5.1. It is submitted that the allocation list approved by the
One Man Committee in the Final Report dated
20.06.2020 is final and the same is to be implemented
by the both the Power Utilities without justifying the
allocation list. It is submitted that TS Power Utilities
have devised office orders only to reopen and review
the allocation exercise which is already concluded and
approved by this Court (Direction No.I).
5.2. It is submitted that the retired / retiring employees are
not part of the financial burden as it was agreed by
both the sides to keep them out of allocation exercise.
It is submitted that financial neutrality was already in
place while preparing 655 = 655. It is submitted that
therefor, thereafter it does not lie in mouth of any
utility that retired / retiring employees are financial
burden on them.
5.3. It is further submitted that a perusal of the judgment
Page 27 of 54
dated 7.12.2020 would show that the objection of TS
Power Utilities with regard to excess allocation and
also with regard to the reciprocity, in respect of 655
number were categorically rejected and the final list
appended to the Concluding Report was expressly
affirmed. It is submitted that there is expressed
direction to the Power Utilities of both the States and
all concerned to implement the report of the One Man
Committee.
5.4. It is submitted that TS Power Utilities has been
involved in jugglery of figures and they have brought
new figures time and again to delay and confuse the
allocation process.
5.5. It is submitted that in terms of direction (VI) of the One
Man Committee both the TS and Andhra Pradesh
Power Utilities were required to issue order of posting
of their joining and granting sufficient time to the
employee to report for duty. It is submitted that the
said direction has been followed by the Andhra
Pradesh Utilities, however Telangana Utilities /
Page 28 of 54
Telangana State has unilaterally altered the allocation
list and denied posting and joining orders to 84
petitioners, which is just contrary to the judgment and
order passed by this Court dated 7.12.2020 and the
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020. It is submitted
that the respondent contemnors have disregarded the
soul of the allocation exercise and are in serious willful
contempt of this Court.
6.0. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties at
length. The present application has been preferred by
the 84 employees of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh
Power Utilities who are relieved by the Andhra Pradesh
Power Utilities, alleging willful and deliberate
disobedience of the directions issued by this Court in
the judgment and order dated 7.12.2020 approving the
concluding report / final report submitted by the One
Man Committee consisting of Justice D M
Dharmadhikari, Former Judge of this Court. At this
stage, it is required to be noted that as such the
Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities have already relieved
Page 29 of 54
the petitioners. However, the respondent alleged
contemnors Telangana State Power Utilities have not
permitted the applicants to join the duty in the
respective TS Power Utilities.
7.0. Before we proceed further to consider the present
application, the history which led to constitute of a
One Man Committee and chronological list and events
are required to be referred to and which as such had
been ultimately dealt with and considered by this
Court in the judgment and order dated 7.12.2020 in
MA No.1270 of 2020 in Civil Appeal No.11435 of 2018
and other allied Applications, which are as under:
At this stage, it is required to be noted that in the
present case, the dispute is concerning the employees
of the Telangana State Power Utilities and Andhra
Pradesh Power Utilities.
7.1. The Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014 was
enacted by Parliament to provide for the reorganization
of the existing State of Andhra Pradesh and for
matters connected therewith. By Section 3, Telangana
Page 30 of 54
State was formed comprising of the territories
mentioned therein and by virtue of Section 4, the State
of Andhra Pradesh was to comprise the territories of
the existing state of Andhra Pradesh. Section 82 of the
Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014 reads as
under:
“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.”
7.2. The State of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh issued
government orders for Distribution Companies, for
Generation Companies and for Transmission
Corporation whereby assets and liabilities of the
aforesaid corporations and companies were
apportioned between the two new States along with the
posts sanctioned for the employees working in those
power sector corporations/companies. However, the
Power Utilities of the two newly formed States (Andhra
Page 31 of 54
Pradesh Power Utilities and Telangana Power Utilities)
could not arrive at any consensus with regard to
modalities for allocation and distribution of personnel.
The power utilities of Telangana unilaterally relieved
1157 employees working with power utilities of
Telangana to join in respective power utilities of
Andhra Pradesh. Number of employees filed writ
petitions in High Court challenging the decision of the
power utilities of Telangana. 242 employees, who were
working in power utilities of Andhra Pradesh got
themselves relieved and joined in power utilities of
Telangana. The power utilities of Telangana were
motivated by principle of nativity, i.e., those employees
whose service records mentioned them as resident of
any part of the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh were
relieved and those who belonged to territory of the
newly formed State of Telangana were permitted to join
at Telangana by their selfoption, against which writ
petition was filed before the High Court. The High
Court by its common judgment dated 02.02.2018
allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned
Page 32 of 54
action of power utilities of Telangana relieving 1157
employees and issued further directions. The High
Court specifically disapproved the principle of nativity,
which was the factor for allocation of the employees by
the Telangana State power utilities.
7.3. The matter reached to this Court and this Court
upheld the order of the High Court. However, noticing
that two States have not been able to arrive at any
consensus and to finally determine the modalities for
distributing the personnel between two States,
appointed One Man Committee consisting of Justice
D.M. Dharmadhikari, a former Judge of this Court. In
the order dated 28.11.2018 this Court specifically
made it clear that the decision of the One Man
Committee shall be final and binding on all the parties
including Power Utility Companies of the two States as
well as the employees and shall be executed by all the
parties as an order of this Court. This Court also
observed that in case any clarification or further
direction is required by any of the parties they are
Page 33 of 54
entitled to approach this Court by filing interlocutory
application in the proceedings.
7.4. That thereafter, after considering the representation by
all concerned and the respective stake holders, the
Committee on 17.04.2019 had finalised XIV modalities
to be adopted for allocation of the personnel between
two States in accordance with Section 82 of the
Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014. Thereafter,
the Telangana Power Generation Corporation Limited
filed an application questioning the modalities
finalised by OneMan Committee. However, this Court
did not entertain the said application. That thereafter,
a report title as “Final Report of OneMan Committee”
dated 26.12.2019 was submitted by OneMan
Committee. Along with the report, a final allocation list
in the two States corporations/companies was
prepared and annexed. List of 655 personnel, who
were to go from Telangana utilities to Andhra Pradesh
utilities as submitted by subCommittee Members on
behalf of Telangana utilities was approved by the
Page 34 of 54
Hon’ble OneMan Committee and was part of the final
list. That the Andhra Pradesh utilities were aggrieved
by the final list communicated in the final report filed
Interlocutory Applications. It was the case on behalf of
the Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities that the modalities
have not been correctly implemented and the list
annexed is not in accordance with the modalities. This
Court disposed of the said application with following
observations:
“This Court by the final judgment having
entrusted the work of allocation to one man
committee, as agreed by parties, the modalities
finalized by one man committee is binding on all,
to which, there is no dissension between the
parties. There being no dispute regarding
modalities, in event, there is some error or
mistake in the working of the modalities that can
be pointed out to the same committee by means
of a representation and we hope and trust that
the committee shall look into the said grievance
and correct the error, if any. We also make it
clear that if the representation is submitted by
the applicant, copy of the same shall be given to
the power utilities of both the Sates, who may
also have liberty to submit a response to those
representation, which may be considered by the
one man committee. The representation be
submitted within two weeks and response
thereto be also submitted within two weeks
thereafter.”
7.5. After the order dated 24.01.2020, the OneMan
Committee after deliberations with all stakeholders
Page 35 of 54
submitted a Supplementary Report dated 11.03.2020.
In the Supplementary Report, it was noticed that T.S.
power utilities relieved employees numbering total 655
to join A.P. power utilities. It also noted that Telangana
Power Utilities are agreeable to accommodate 71
employees from Andhra Pradesh to Telangana State
companies as they are special cases like of spouses,
medical and handicapped employees or their
dependents.
7.6. In the Supplementary Report, the OneMan Committee
directed that the entire allocation process based on the
allocation list with the Final Report and
Supplementary Report be completed by 30.03.2020. A
clarification dated 13.03.2020 was also issued by the
OneMan Committee. Aggrieved by Supplementary
Report, the Telangana power utilities filed
Miscellaneous Application No. 920 of 2020 with regard
to 584 employees, who were directed to be identified by
SubCommittee Members of Andhra Pradesh. This
Court disposed of the said application observing that
Page 36 of 54
the objections with regard to 584 employees were to be
considered by One Man Committee.
7.7. OneMan Committee after the order of this Court dated
01.05.2020 issued a Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020. In the Concluding Report, an allocation
list submitted by Andhra Pradesh utilities was
approved. The Committee noticed that 655 employees
have been allocated from Telangana State to Andhra
Pradesh and equal numbers from Andhra Pradesh to
Telangana including 71 names from Andhra Pradesh
to Telangana, which was held to be of special cases
like spouse and medical cases. Certain further
directions were given by the OneMan Committee in
the Concluding Report in paragraph 29 like approving
the list of SubCommittee Members of the Andhra
Pradesh. In the Concluding Report, directions are to
the following effect:
“Directions:
I. In addition to the Directions contained in Para
21 of the Supplementary Report of this
Committee regarding retired employees on both
sides, it is further directed, that in both the
States, employees who have attained or will be
Page 37 of 54
attaining 58 Years of age in the year 2020 will
be kept out of the allocation process and their
names in the Allocation Lists will be removed.
II. In the allocation process of the present
dimension and undertaken after 5 years delay,
it is not possible for the Committee to satisfy
individual needs and comforts and service
prospects of every employee. The allocation
process has been finalized on laid down
principles contained in the modalities and elbow
room, wherever permissible, in the modalities
has been given effect to. The committee however
directs the Sub Committee member of AP to reexamine any left out spouse and medical cases
and every attempt should be made to
accommodate them in the state of their option.
III. All SC/ST employees cases be reexamined to
accommodate them as per modality VIII in the
State where they are notified as SCs or STs so
as not to affect their future service growth.
IV. All the employees finally allocated to a Public
Utility will be paid regular salary from January
2020 and arrears of salary due with other
benefits attached to the posts. The payments of
salary partly or fully made by the Companies in
the Two States in the interim period pending
finalization of allocation during coronavirus
pandemic, will be shared/reimbursed by the
companies in the Two States mutually by paying
and claiming reimbursement, if necessary, for
the payments made in the interim period. It is
made clear that the entire burden of salary and
arrears of salary for each employee would be on
the Company to which the employee is finally
allocated and the said Company will reimburse
interim payments pending allocation made if any
by the Company to which the employee has not
been finally allocated.
V. All employees not included in the Allocation
Page 38 of 54
List of AP and TS and serving on "order to serve"
basis in the Companies on the formation of the
Two States in 2014 would be deemed to have
been allocated to the Company where they are
presently posted and working.
VI. Based on the allocation lists, both TS and AP
utilities will issue orders of posting and joining,
with granting sufficient time to the employees to
report for duties, keeping into consideration the
constrains on movements in the current
coronavirus pandemic period and the consequent
lockdown imposed.
VII. All Employers of the Power Utilities in the
Two States will facilitate smooth posting and
joining of employees in the Companies of the
Two States and the Government and the Police
Authorities of Two States will cooperate and also
facilitate the movement of the employees
allocated from one Company in the State to
Company in another Slate.
VIII. The allocation finally made by this
committee is binding on both the employers and
the employees and any violation thereof and non
implementation of said allocation be reported to
Supreme Court for remedial/Punitive action.”
7.8. After the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020, a
member of the SubCommittee of Andhra Pradesh
power utilities sent a letter dated 26.06.2020 as
compliance report. By the said letter, 119 employees,
who were dropped from the list of incoming employees
from Telangana State power utilities to Andhra
Pradesh power utilities and further 50 names were
Page 39 of 54
dropped of employees in outgoing list of employees
from Andhra Pradesh power utilities to Telangana
State power utilities and 10 further employees were
relieved from Andhra Pradesh power utilities for the
reasons mentioned therein.
After submission of the Concluding Report dated
20.06.2020 and followup action taken by the Andhra
Pradesh Power utilities, number of miscellaneous
applications have been filed by Telangana State Power
Utilities, by several employees as well as employees’
associations. The Telangana State Power Utilities
Generation Corporation prays for the following reliefs:
“a) Clarify that the Concluding Report dated 20
062020 submitted by the Hon’ble OneMan
Committee is illegal and arbitrary, being contrary
to the Orders passed by this Hon’ble court and
the Final Report dated 26122019 submitted by
the Hon’ble OneMan Committee.
b) Confirm the allocation of 1157 employees and
242 employees made by the Hon'ble OneMan
Committee as per Final Report dt. 26122018,
(i.e., the Allocation of 744 (502 +242) to TS Power
Utilities and 655 from TS to AP Power utilities),
as Final in terms of the Order dt. 28.11.2018
passed in present Civil Appeal. c) Clarify that the
allocation of 4460 and 71 employees (4531) to TS
Power Utilities vide Final Report dt. 26.12.2019
and Supplementary Report dt. 11.03.2020, is
final and no further allocation to TS Power
Page 40 of 54
Utilities is Permissible.
d) Clarify that the Supplementary Report in so far
as Para No.27, authorizing the Member, Subcommittee of AP to unilaterally identify and
allocate 584 employees to TS Power Utilities is
contrary to the orders dated 28112018 in Civil
Appeal No.11435/2018.
e) Clarify the orders dated 28112018 in Civil
Appeal No. 11435 of 2018 passed by this
Hon'bIe Court; and
f) Pass such other or further order(s) as may be
deemed fit and appropriate by this Hon’ble Court
in the facts and circumstances of the present
case.”
7.9. Similar prayers were made by other Telangana Power
Utilities. That by a detailed order dated 7.12.2020,
this Court dismissed the Miscellaneous Applications
filed by the Telangana State Power Utilities. While
dismissing the respective Miscellaneous Applications
filed by the Telangana State Power Utilities which
were dismissed after considering in detailed the rival
submissions/ objections against the final report dated
20.06.2020, certain observations are made by this
Court, which are very relevant while considering the
present application, which are as under:
Page 41 of 54
40. We may further observe that the list of 655
employees submitted by Telangana State
power utilities for allocation to Andhra Pradesh
power utilities has been approved by the OneMan Committee for which there is no dispute.
The OneMan Committee has undertaken
exercise to identify the list of 655 employees
from Andhra Pradesh power utilities to be
transferred to Telangana State power utilities.
The proceeding to balance the number of
employees from Telangana State power utilities
to Andhra Pradesh power utilities being 655,
we fail to understand that how the applicants
can raise the issue regarding number of
allocable employees to be considered by this
Court in these proceedings.
41. The submission which has been much pressed
by the learned counsel for the applicants is that
number of employees allocated to Telangana
State power utilities is much more as compared
to those which have been allocated from
Telangana State power utilities to Andhra
Pradesh power utilities. The applicants have
repeatedly in their application and their
objection before the OneMan Committee have
referred to 502 out of 1157, 242 selfrelieved
employees and 71 spouse and medical cases
plus 584 which have been permitted to be
identified by Member of Andhra Pradesh SubCommittee. The submission is that
502+242+71+584 becomes 1399, hence 1399
have been allocated to Telangana State power
utilities as against 655, which has been
allocated from Telangana State power utilities
to Andhra Pradesh power utilities. We may
need to look into the above submission on the
basis of each figure claimed by the applicant.
42. Now, coming to figure 502, which according to
the applicant is balance from 1157 by reducing
it by 655. The 502 figure as noted above, 1157
is the number of persons, which were initially
Page 42 of 54
relieved by Telangana State power utilities to
Andhra Pradesh power utilities unilaterally
which decision was set aside by the High Court
and was upheld by this Court. Out of 1157
only 655 have been allocated to Andhra
Pradesh power utilities, which was approved
by Final Report dated 26.12.2019 of the OneMan Committee. How allocation of 502 is
claimed when they are the employees, who
remained on Telangana State without they
being allocated to Andhra Pradesh power
utilities apart from 655 from Telangana State to
Andhra Pradesh. Further employees working in
Telangana State were allowed to remain in
Telangana State, hence, allocation from
Telangana State to Andhra Pradesh is only 655
and addition of 502 is wholly inappropriate.
43. Now, we come to number 242, which is number
of selfrelieved employees from Andhra
Pradesh to Telangana State. Admittedly, 242
employees are, thus, who got themselves selfrelieved from Andhra Pradesh without there
being any order or without there being any
direction by anyone. These 242 employees
were permitted joining by Telangana power
utilities by its own. These 242 employees
having never been allocated to nor being part of
any allocation cannot be added in figure by
Telangana State. Now, we come to 71, which is
agreed spouse and medical ground cases by
both the parties. 71 is part of 655, which is
now being identified by Andhra Pradesh to be
allocated to Telangana State. By taking this
no.71 in Supplementary Report permitting
Andhra Pradesh to identify only 584, thus, it is
only 584+71, i.e., 655 employees, which are
now being sought to be allocated to the
Telangana State by One Man Committee. We,
thus, do not find any merit in the contention of
the applicant that 1399 employees have been
allocated to Telangana State as against 655
allocated from Telangana State to Andhra
Page 43 of 54
Pradesh.
46. The objection that list of 584 is not out of 2165
was considered by the OneMan Committee,
which is reflected from the Concluding Report
dated 20.06.2020. The above objection has
been duly considered and answered by the
OneMan Committee in paragraphs 25, 26, 27
and 28 of the Concluding Report, which is to
the following effect:
“25. The second submission on behalf of
TS is that with the Supplementary Report,
this Committee had Identified total 2165
employees in the list given to AP Sub
Committee member for proposing
allocation from that list. It is urged on
behalf of TS, that allocation list proposed
by AP is not out of 2165 listed employees
with the Supplementary Report of this
Committee.
26. It is true, as urged on behalf of TS,
that with the Supplementary Report, this
Committee had identified 2165 employees
bused on modality Nos. 5 which requires
consideration of every employee for his
home district and his adjustment as far as
possible in the State in which his home
district falls.
27. This Committee has to be open to
correction. The Committee is also of the
view that modality No. V alone is not
decisive and modalities no. I to IV are to
be cumulatively taken into consideration
and applied to make allocation in
proportion to the available posts in each
Company in the Two States. TS side has
accepted that 114 employees from out of
584 employees proposed for allocation by
A.P to T.S are included in 2165 employees
identified by this Committee in the lint
Page 44 of 54
annexed with Supplementary Report. The
remaining 470 employees (falling outside
2165 employees identified with the
supplementary report) have been proposed
by A.P for T.S in the report of the Sub
Committee Member. The justification
shown is that it is to match the number of
employees with the available posts in
various companies.
28. In the above circumstances, mentioned
above, this Committee finds the Allocation
Lists companywise and postwise
proposed by AP deserves approval and it
is so approved.”
48. Now, one more objection of the applicants,
which needs to be noticed is the objection that
even the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020
is not final report and SubCommittee Member
of Andhra Pradesh has been authorised to
modify the list. Applicants have referred to
direction Nos. I, II and III of the Concluding
Report, which is to the following effect:
I. In addition to the Directions contained in
Para 21 of the Supplementary Report of
this Committee regarding retired employees
on both sides, it is further directed, that in
both the States, employees who have
attained or will be attaining 58 Years of
age in the year 2020 will be kept out of the
allocation process and their names in the
Allocation Lists will be removed.
II. In the allocation process of the present
dimension and undertaken after 5 years
delay, it is not possible for the Committee
to satisfy individual needs and comforts
and service prospects of every employee.
The allocation process has been finalized
on laid down principles contained in the
modalities and elbow room, wherever
Page 45 of 54
permissible, in the modalities has been
given effect to. The committee however
directs the Sub Committee member of AP to
reexamine any leftout spouse and
medical cases and every attempt should
be made to accommodate them in the state
of their option.
III. All SC/ST employees cases be
reexamined to accommodate them as per
modality VIII in the State where they are
notified as SCs or STs so as not to affect
their future service growth.
49. Now, we first take the direction No.I of the One
Man Committee that those who have attained
or will be attaining 58 Years of age in the year
2020 will be kept out of the allocation process
and their names in the Allocation Lists will be
removed. In Supplementary Report in
paragraph 21, the OneMan Committee has
stated:
“21. It was also agreed by the Parties that all
retired employees between years 2014 to 2020
in each Power Utility in each State need not be
displaced only for pensioner benefits payable
to them.”
50. The above indicates that both the parties had
agreed before the OneMan Committee that all
retired employees between years 2014 to 2020
in each power utility in each State need not be
displaced. Thus, the above was agreement
between both the parties before the OneMan
Committee and direction No.I only an extension
of the said agreement, i.e., whoever shall be
attaining 58 years of age in 2020 shall be kept
out of allocation process. As per paragraph 21
of the Supplementary Report, those, who retire
till then were already kept out of the allocation
and the extension till the end of 2020 cannot be
said to be unreasonable. The allocation process
Page 46 of 54
being not yet finalised and awaiting
finalisation for last several years, those who
retire either in Telangana State or Andhra
Pradesh has rightly been decided not to be
displaced only for the purpose of shouldering
pensionary liability. The direction No.I is
equitable.
51. The applicants further submit that after the
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 by letter
dated 26.06.2020, Andhra Pradesh power
utilities have struck 119 names from the
incoming 655 list from the Telangana State
power utilities to Andhra Pradesh power
utilities. We are of the view that the said
dropping is only consequential to the decision
of the OneMan Committee as reflected in
paragraph 21 of Supplementary Report and
direction No.I of Concluding Report. The Andhra
Pradesh power utilities have also deleted 50
names from the list of 584 employees outgoing
from Andhra Pradesh power utilities to
Telangana State power utilities, which was
again in compliance of the OneMan
Committee’s decision. Any consequential action
taken in pursuance of the Concluding Report
cannot be said to be not contemplated by the
final Concluding Report or cannot be said to be
an open ended report. The consequence of
Concluding Report has to be taken to its logical
ends. Further, 10 employees have been added
by direction Nos. II and the reasons have been
given in the letter dated 26.06.2020 for
relieving them, which is again consequence of
direction Nos.I and II. We, thus, are of the view
that the OneMan Committee has considered all
materials and objections placed before it by
both sides including the representation of the
employees and employees organisations
submitted from time to time. The process which
was initiated by submitting Final Report dated
26.12.2019 was supplemented by
Supplementary Report dated 11.03.2020 and
Page 47 of 54
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020. The OneMan Committee being aware of all objections
and having taken a conscious decision to
finalise the allocation between two States, we
do not find any such error in the process which
may warrant any clarification or direction by
this Court. We may further notice that the
exercise undertaken by the OneMan
Committee is to allocate 655 from Telangana
State to Andhra Pradesh and same number
from Andhra Pradesh to Telangana State.
Apart from the above two allocations, other
personnel, who were working in Telangana
State and Andhra Pradesh were not disturbed
by allocation.
52. Learned counsel for the applicants have also
taken exception to reciprocity of 655 number.
We do not find that there is any error in
reciprocity. The OneMan Committee took a
decision that when 655 employees are coming
from Telangana State to Andhra Pradesh, same
number should go from Andhra Pradesh to
Telangana State. In the Concluding Report,
final list has been annexed, which is utilitywise and personnelwise, which is clear and
unambiguous. We, thus, do not find any merit
in the Miscellaneous Applications filed by
Telangana State power utilities being M.A. Nos.
1286, 1290, 1292 and 1291, which are
dismissed.”
8.0. Thus, from the above, it is apparent that this Court
specifically observed and held that the Final Report
dated 26.12.2019 submitted by the One Man
Committee along with allocation list is final and
conclusive and is binding to both the States and
Page 48 of 54
respective Power Utilities viz. Telangana Power
Utilities and Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities. The only
exception was with respect to those employees who
attained the age of 58 years in the year 2020. Those
employees with the consent of the respective Power
Utilities were kept out of allocation process. It is to be
noted that the respective applicants – 84 petitioners
figured in the final list prepared by One Man
Committee. The names of the petitioners are duly
mentioned in the said list of the One Man Committee
Report which is prepared Utilities wise. Out of 84
petitioners and as per the Final List of 28 petitioners
had to be absorbed in TS Genco, 35 petitioners had to
be absorbed in TS Transco and 21 petitioners had to
be absorbed in TS Discoms. As observed herein
above, the respective Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities
have already relieved respective petitioners and
thereafter they are no more continued with their
erstwhile employers – Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities
respectively. Therefore, once the names of the 84
petitioners figured in the Final List prepared by the
Page 49 of 54
One Man Committee and the Final Report has been
accepted and approved by this Court and it is directed
that both the States and their respective State Power
Utilities are bound by the Final Report of the One
Man Committee and Final List prepared and
communicated with the Supplementary Report / Final
Report, thereafter any deviation from the same would
tantamount to willful disobedience of the directions
issued by this Court. At this stage, it is required to be
noted that in the earlier order, this Court has
specifically observed and made it clear that the
decision of the One Man Committee shall be final and
binding on all the parties including the Power Utilities
Companies of the two States as well as employees and
shall be executed by all the parties as an order of this
Court. In that view of the matter, the respective
subsequent office orders dated 17.12.2020 (issued by
the TS Genco), office order dated 18.12.2020 (issued
by the TS Transco), office order dated 18.12.2020
( issued by the TSNPDCL) and the office order dated
19.12.2020 (issued by the TSSPDCL) are just contrary
Page 50 of 54
to the directions issued by this Court and contrary to
the Supplementary Report / Final Report submitted
by the One Man Committee dated 20.06.2020 which
would tantamount to willful disobedience of the
directions issued by this Court. Again, the Telangana
State Power Utilities have raised the same issues with
respect to the Reciprocity and Financial Neutrality,
which were earlier raised before this court by filing
respective Miscellaneous Applications and same came
to be dismissed by this court vide order dated
7.12.2020. Thereafter, to raise the same objections /
issues again by the Telangana State Power Utilities
would tantamount to willful disobedience of the
directions issued by this Court. Telangana State
Power Utilities cannot be permitted to raise the same
objections / issues again and again, which were
earlier raised before this Court and this Court held
against the Telangana State Power Utilities. There
must be an end to a litigation. By permitting the
Telangana State Power Utilities and /or any other
parties to raise the issues / objections again and
Page 51 of 54
again, the object and purpose of constituting One
Man Committee by this Court would be frustrated.
This Court purposefully directed to constitute the One
Man Committee consisting of Mr. Justice D M
Dharmadhikari, Former Judge of this Court to put an
end to the litigation with respect to the allocation of
the employees and other disputes with respect to the
respective Power Utilities of both the States. It is very
unfortunate that the State of Telangana and
Telangana Power Utilities have continued to reagitate
the issues, which are already held against them
earlier.
9.0. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above,
we hold the respective Telangana Power Utilities for
willful and deliberate disobedience of the judgment
and order passed by this Court dated 7.12.2020 in
MA No.1270 of 2020 in Civil Appeal No.11435 of 2018
and other allied Miscellaneous Applications and we
hold them guilty for the contempt for the same, for
which, they are liable to be suitably punished. At this
Page 52 of 54
stage, it is required to be noted that as observed
herein above, the petitioners are already relieved by
the Andhra Pradesh Power Utilities since long and
because of the aforesaid office orders the respective
petitioners are not permitted to join in the respective
Telangana Power Utilities and their future is at stake
and they are without any salary from the date they
are relieved by the respective Andhra Pradesh Power
Utilities. Before we pass any further order on the
sentence / punishment, we give one additional
opportunity to the respective Telangana Power
Utilities i.e. TS Genco, TS Transco, TSSPDCL and
TSNPDCL to comply with the directions issued by this
Court in the final judgment and order dated
7.12.2020 and Concluding Final Report submitted by
the One Man Committee dated 20.06.2020 and to
absorb all the respective petitioners in the respective
Telangana Power Utilities / establishment as per the
list approved by the One Man Committee which would
have a direct bearing on the punishment / sentence
to be imposed. We give further two weeks’ time to
Page 53 of 54
respective Telangana Power Utilities / Corporation to
absorb the petitioners. We also direct the respective
Telangana Power Utilities viz. TS Genco, TS Transco,
TSSPDCL and TSNPDCL to pay salary and other
service benefits to the petitioners from the day they
are relieved by the respective Andhra Pradesh Power
Utilities, to be implemented within two weeks.
Put up on 31.10.2022 for further order.
…………………………………J.
(M. R. SHAH)
…………………………………J.
New Delhi, (A.S. BOPANNA)
October 11, 2022.
Page 54 of 54
Comments
Post a Comment