# TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO) v. ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. Miscellaneous Application No (s). 1270/2020 In

- **Citation:** [2020] 13 S.C.R. 987
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2020-12-07
- **Case number:** Miscellaneous Application No. 1270 of 2020
- **Bench:** Ashok Bhushan, M. R. Shah
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/telangana-power-generation-corporation-ltd-tsgenco-v-andhra-pradesh-power-34218
- **Pages:** 43

## Headnote

Service Law - Allocation of employees - Andhra Pradesh
Reorganisation Act, 2014 - ss.3,4 and 82 - Dispute relating to
allocation of the employees of the power sector undertakings in the
States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh arose in wake of the
division of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh into two States,
namely, the State of Telangana and the residuary State of Andhra
Pradesh - The power utilities of the two newly formed States 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
- 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 self-option, against which writ petition was filed before the
High Court - The High Court by its judgment dated 02.02.2018
allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned action of power
utilities of Telangana relieving 1157 employees and issued further
directions - In appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the judgment of
the High Court and with the agreement of the parties entrusted the
task to one-Man Committee for distributing the personnel between
the States - The process which was initiated by submitting Final
Report dated 26.12.2019 was supplemented by Supplementary
Report dated 11.03.2020 and Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020
- In the Concluding Report, an allocation list submitted by Andhra
[2020] 13 S.C.R. 987
987
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
988
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
Pradesh utilities was approved - The Committee noticed that 655
employees were 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 One-Man Committee along with the
concluding report - Various Miscellaneous applications were filed
- There were various objections against the One-Man Committee
report - Held: The One-Man Committee being aware of all objections
and having taken a conscious decision to finalise the allocation
between two States, there is no error in the process which may
warrant any clarification or direction - Applicants have taken
exception to reciprocity of 655 number - There is no error in
reciprocity - The One-Man 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 was annexed, which is utilitywise and personnel-wise, which is clear and unambiguous - Thus,
power utilities of both the States and all concerned to carry out and
implement the directions of the One-Man Committee Report.
Service Law - Allocation of employees - Andhra Pradesh
Reorganisaiton Act, 2014 - ss.3,4 and 82 - Challenge to allocation
done by One-Man Committee - Held: In the instant case, the OneMan Committee was entrusted only with distribution of personnel
between the two States, which distribution has been finalised by the
One-Man Committee - Insofar as the allocation made by the OneMan Committee, no objection or challenge by any employee or
officer is entertainable, it was further clarified that the One-Man
Committee having completed the process of allocation, the said
allocation cannot be challenged by any employee or officer or any
utility before any forum.
Disposing of the Miscellaneous Applications, the Court
HELD: 1. One 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 Sub-Comm

## Text

_Characters 0–39,986 of 103,120. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39986 for what follows._

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
987
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD. (TSGENCO)
v.
ANDHRA PRADESH POWER GENERATION
CORPORATION LTD.
Miscellaneous Application No (s). 1270/2020
In
(Civil Appeal No (s). 11435/2018)
DECEMBER 07, 2020.
[ASHOK BHUSHAN AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Service Law - Allocation of employees - Andhra Pradesh
Reorganisation Act, 2014 - ss.3,4 and 82 - Dispute relating to
allocation of the employees of the power sector undertakings in the
States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh arose in wake of the
division of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh into two States,
namely, the State of Telangana and the residuary State of Andhra
Pradesh - The power utilities of the two newly formed States 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
- 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 self-option, against which writ petition was filed before the
High Court - The High Court by its judgment dated 02.02.2018
allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned action of power
utilities of Telangana relieving 1157 employees and issued further
directions - In appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the judgment of
the High Court and with the agreement of the parties entrusted the
task to one-Man Committee for distributing the personnel between
the States - The process which was initiated by submitting Final
Report dated 26.12.2019 was supplemented by Supplementary
Report dated 11.03.2020 and Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020
- In the Concluding Report, an allocation list submitted by Andhra
[2020] 13 S.C.R. 987
987
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
988
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
Pradesh utilities was approved - The Committee noticed that 655
employees were 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 One-Man Committee along with the
concluding report - Various Miscellaneous applications were filed
- There were various objections against the One-Man Committee
report - Held: The One-Man Committee being aware of all objections
and having taken a conscious decision to finalise the allocation
between two States, there is no error in the process which may
warrant any clarification or direction - Applicants have taken
exception to reciprocity of 655 number - There is no error in
reciprocity - The One-Man 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 was annexed, which is utilitywise and personnel-wise, which is clear and unambiguous - Thus,
power utilities of both the States and all concerned to carry out and
implement the directions of the One-Man Committee Report.
Service Law - Allocation of employees - Andhra Pradesh
Reorganisaiton Act, 2014 - ss.3,4 and 82 - Challenge to allocation
done by One-Man Committee - Held: In the instant case, the OneMan Committee was entrusted only with distribution of personnel
between the two States, which distribution has been finalised by the
One-Man Committee - Insofar as the allocation made by the OneMan Committee, no objection or challenge by any employee or
officer is entertainable, it was further clarified that the One-Man
Committee having completed the process of allocation, the said
allocation cannot be challenged by any employee or officer or any
utility before any forum.
Disposing of the Miscellaneous Applications, the Court
HELD: 1. One 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 Sub-Committee 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. Now, taking note of the direction No.I of the One-Man
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
989
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.
According to the Supplementary report, both the parties had
agreed before the One-Man 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 One-Man 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 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. [Paras 48, 49 and
50][1025-A-B, F-G; 1026-A-C]
2. The applicants submitted 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. This Court is of the view that the said dropping is
only consequential to the decision of the One-Man 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 One-Man
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. This Court, thus, is
of the view that the One-Man Committee has considered all
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION v. A.P. POWER
GENERATION CORPORATION LTD.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
990
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
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 Concluding Report
dated 20.06.2020. The One-Man Committee being aware of all
objections and having taken a conscious decision to finalise the
allocation between two States, this Court does not find any such
error in the process which may warrant any clarification or
direction by this Court. This Court may further notice that the
exercise undertaken by the One-Man 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.
[Para 51][1026-D-H; 1027-A-B]
3. The applicants have also taken exception to reciprocity
of 655 number. This Court does not find that there is any error in
reciprocity. The One-Man 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 utility-wise and personnel-wise, which is clear
and unambiguous. This Court, thus, does 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. [Para 52][1027-B-D]
4. With regard to other M.A.s, this Court makes it clear
that the One-Man Committee was entrusted only with distribution
of personnel between the two States, which distribution has been
finalised by the One-Man Committee. Insofar as the allocation
made by the One-Man Committee, no objection or challenge by
any employee or officer is entertainable, this Court clarifies that
the One-Man Committee having completed the process of
allocation, the said allocation cannot be challenged by any
employee or officer or any utility before any forum. Insofar as
other claims regarding salary or allowances as raised in different
M.A.s, they need no consideration in these proceedings and
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
991
employees of power utilities are free to adjudicate their claims
before appropriate forum in accordance with law. All other M.A.s
are disposed of accordingly. [Para 57][1029-B-C]
Telangana Judges Association v. Union of India (2018)
SCC Online SC 1729 - referred to.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Miscellaneous Application
No. 1270 of 2020 in Civil Appeal No. 11435 of 2018.
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.11.2018 of the Supreme
Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 11435 of 2018.
With
Miscellaneous Application No (s).1286/2020 in Civil Appeal
No (s). 11435/2018, Miscellaneous Application....Diary No. 13844/2020
in Civil Appeal No (s).11435/2018, Miscellaneous Application No (s).
1287/2020 in Civil Appeal No (s).11435/2018, Miscellaneous Application
No (s). 1290/2020 in Civil Appeal No (s).11436/2018, Miscellaneous
Application No (s). 1292/2020 in Civil Appeal No (s).11438/2018,
Miscellaneous Application No (s). 1331/2020 in Civil Appeal No (s).11435/
2018, Miscellaneous Application No (s). 1291/2020 in Civil Appeal
No (s). 11437/2018, Miscellaneous Application No (s). 1289/2020 in Civil
Appeal No (s). 11435/2018, Miscellaneous Application No (s).
1293/2020 in Civil Appeal No(s).11440/2018, Miscellaneous
Application...Diary No.16612/2020 in Civil Appeal No (s). 11435/2018,
Miscellaneous Application No (s). 1631/2020 in Civil Appeal No (s).
11435/2018, Miscellaneous Application Diary No.19295/2020 in Civil
Appeal No (s). 11453/2018, Miscellaneous Application....Diary No.
19982/2020 in Civil Appeal No (s). 11453/2018.
Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG, Mukul Rohatgi, V. Giri, G. Vidyasagar,
Vivek K Tankha, Vinay Navare, Ranjit Kumar, Rakesh Dwivedi,
R. Balasubramanian, P.V. Surendranath, P.S. Narasimha, Rana
Mukherjee, Neeraj Kishan Kaul, A.K. Sanghi, Sr. Advs., D. Abhinav
Rao, Harsh Parashar, Ms. Tanvi Bhatnagar, Ms. Jhanvi Dubey, Sandeep
Sudhakar Deshmukh, Sachin Sharma, Ms. Sujata Bagadhi, Venkateswara
Rao Anumolu, Ravi Shankar Jindhiyala, Deepak Kumar Singh, Sravan
Kumar, Gautam Singh, Krishna Kumar Singh, Subhash Chandran KR,
Ms. Resmitha R. Chandran, Ms. Lekha Sudhakaran, Ms. Sindoora,
R. Balaji, Hitendra Nath Rath, Srijan Sinha, Himanshu Chaubey,
Ashwarya Sinha, Puneet Jain, Nishant Sharma, Rakesh K. Sharma,
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION v. A.P. POWER
GENERATION CORPORATION LTD.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
992
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
Deepak Joshi, Akash Lamba, Wazir Singh Malik, B.V. Balram Das, Ms.
Nachiketa Joshi, P.V. Yogeshwaran, Ms. Swarupama Chaturvedi,
Mahfooz A. Nazki, Polanki Gowtham, Shaik Mohamad Haneef, Amitabh
Sinha, Shrey Sharma, Gurmeet Singh Makker, Rajat Nair, Apoorv Kurup,
V. Sridhar Reddy, Sunder Khatri, Abhijit Sengupta, P. Venkat Reddy,
Prashant Tyagi, P. Srinivas Reddy for M/S. Venkat Palwai Law
Associates, Advs. for the appearing parties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.
1. These Miscellaneous Applications have been filed in Civil
Appeal No.11435 of 2018 decided by this Court vide judgment dated
28.11.2018. Civil Appeal No. 11435 of 2018 was filed against the common
judgment dated 02.02.2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh
in Writ Petition No.17994 of 2015 and other connected writ petitions.
2. The High Court vide its judgment dated 02.02.2018 decided the
bunch of writ petitions raising the dispute pertaining to allocation of the
employees of the power sector undertakings in the States of Telangana
and Andhra Pradesh. The disputes arose in the wake of the division of
the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh into two States, namely, the State
of Telangana and the residuary state of Andhra Pradesh by Andhra
Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014. This Court vide its judgment dated
28.11.2018 while upholding the judgment of the High Court with the
agreement of the learned counsel for the parties appointed a One-Man
Committee consisting of Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari, a former Judge
of this Court for distributing the personnel between two States. After
the judgment of this Court dated 28.11.2018, One-Man Committee
proceeded to formulate the modalities for distributing the personnel,
prepared the reports allocating the personnel at several stages. The
miscellaneous applications were filed in this Court in the civil appeal in
pursuance of the liberty granted by this Court in its judgment dated
28.11.2018 permitting the parties to approach the Court by filing an
interlocutory application, if any, clarification or further directions were
required.
3. The present set of miscellaneous applications have been filed
by Telangana Power Utilities, certain employees and employees'
associations after submission of the concluding report dated 20.06.2020
by the One-Man Committee.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
993
4. Before we proceed to consider the present set of miscellaneous
applications, it is necessary to notice the genesis of dispute.
5. The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisaiton Act, 2014 (hereinafter
referred to as "Act, 2014") was enacted by Parliament to provide for
the reorganisation of the existing State of Andhra Pradesh and for matters
connected therewith. By Section 3, Telangana 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. In the present case, we are concerned
only with power utilities. Related provision for employees of public sector
undertaking is contained in Section 82, which is to the following effect:-
"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."
6. 02.06.2014 was notified as the appointed date under the Andhra
Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014. In the United State of Andhra
Pradesh, existing power utilities where Andhra Pradesh Generation
Corporation, Andhra Pradesh Transmission Corporation and four Power
Distribution Companies described as Eastern, Southern, Central and
Northern DISCOMS. The State of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh issued
Government Orders dated 29.05.2014, No.24 for Distribution Companies,
Government Order No.25 for Generation Companies and Government
Order No.26 for Transmission Corporation whereby assets and liabilities
of the aforesaid corporations and companies were apportioned between
the two new States alongwith the posts sanctioned for the employees
working in those power sector corporations/companies. The power
utilities of the two newly formed States could not arrive at any consensus
with regard to modalities for allocation and distribution of personnel.
7. 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 POWER GENERATION CORPORATION v. A.P. POWER
GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
994
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
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 self-option,
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 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.
8. Telangana Power Generation Corporation Limited filed Civil
Appeal No. 11435/2018 questioning the judgment of High Court. 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,
this Court with the agreement of the parties entrusted the task to OneMan Committee, i.e., Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari, a former Judge of
this Court. While ending the order dated 28.11.20218, this Court further
clearly stated:-
"We make it clear that the decision of the one man
Committee head by Justice Dharmadhikari 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."
9. This Court, however, while disposing the appeal had observed
that in case, any clarification or further direction is required by any of
the parties they are entitled to approach this Court by filing interlocutory
application in the proceedings. One-Man Committee constituted a subCommittee consisting of two members representing one each of the
power utilities of both the States. Many employees, individuals also
appeared and filed representations before the Committee. 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. Telangana Power
Generation Corporation Limited filed an application being M.A. No. 851
of 2019 questioning the modalities finalised by One-Man Committee.
However, this Court did not entertain the application. A report cited as
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
995
"Final Report of One-Man Committee" dated 26.12.2019 was submitted
by One-Man Committee. Alongwith 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 sub-Committee Members on behalf of Telangana
utilities was approved by the Hon'ble One-Man Committee and was
part of the final list. The Andhra Pradesh utilities being felt aggrieved by
the final list communicated in the final report filed I.A. Nos. 11779/2020,
11752/2020 and 11785/2020. It was stated by learned counsel for the
applicant that they have no grievance with regard to modalities. Their
submission was that the modalities have not been correctly implemented
and the list annexed is not in accordance with the modalities. The
applications were disposed of by this Court on 24.01.2020. This Court
while disposing the applications made 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."
10. After the order dated 24.01.2020, the One-Man Committee
after deliberations with all stakeholders 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 dependants.
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION v. A.P. POWER
GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
996
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
11. In the Supplementary Report, the One-Man Committee
entrusted the work to the member of the Sub-Committee representing
Andhra Pradesh side, of identification of 584 employees for allocating
them from A.P. power utilities to T.S. power utilities. One-Man Committee
also issued directions for payment of salary for 655 employees, who
were relieved from Telangana utilities to Andhra Pradesh. One-Man
Committee directed that entire allocation process based on the allocation
lists 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
application observing that objections with regard to 584 employees were
to be considered by One Man Committee. On an application submitted
by One-Man Committee, this Court also passed an order for payment of
salary to the allocated employees.
12. One-Man 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 Sub-Committee 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 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
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
997
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 re-examine
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 re-examined 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 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.
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION v. A.P. POWER
GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
998
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
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."
13. After the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020, a member of
the Sub-Committee 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 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.
14. After the submission of the Concluding Report and follow-up
action taken by the Andhra Pradesh power utilities, this group of
miscellaneous applications have been filed. The miscellaneous applications
have been filed by Telangana State power utilities, by several employees
as well as employees' associations in M.A. No. 1286/2020 filed by
Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Ltd., a common counter
affidavit has been filed by Andhra Pradesh power utilities. The M.A.
No. 1286 of 2020 as well as counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit
filed therein shall be referred to while deciding these batch of
miscellaneous applications.
15. We may now briefly notice prayers made in different
Miscellaneous Applications placed before us for consideration:-
M.A. No. 1270/2020
M.A. No. 1270 of 2020 is a miscellaneous application which was
registered by Court's Motion on Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020
sent by One-Man Committee to this Court.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
999
M.A. DIARY NO. 13844/2020
This M.A. Diary has been filed by T.N. Sudhakara Murthy and
32 others seeking a direction to A.P. and T.S. utilities not to give effect
to direction No.I of the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020. They seek
direction to A.P. power utilities to retain the applicants as per their options.
M.A. NO. 1286/2020
M.A. No.1286 of 2020 has been filed by Telangana State Power
Generation Corporation Ltd. The M.A. questions the Concluding Report
dated 20.06.2020 submitted by One-Man Committee. In the M.A.
following prayers have been made:-
"a) Clarify that the Concluding Report dated 20-06-2020 submitted
by the Hon'ble One-Man Committee is illegal and arbitrary, being
contrary to the Orders passed by this Hon'ble court and the Final
Report dated 26-12-2019 submitted by the Hon'ble One-Man
Committee.
b) Confirm the allocation of 1157 employees and 242 employees
made by the Hon'ble One-Man Committee as per Final Report
dt. 26-12-2018, (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 Utilities is Permissible.
d) Clarify that the Supplementary Report in so far as Para No.27,
authorizing the Member, Sub-committee of AP to unilaterally
identify and allocate 584 employees to TS Power Utilities is
contrary to the orders dated 28-11-2018 in Civil Appeal No.11435/
2018.
e) Clarify the orders dated 28-11-2018 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."
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION v. A.P. POWER
GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1000
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
M.A. NO.1287/2020
This M.A. has been filed by APSPDCL relieved employees
(allotted to TSNPDCL). The applicants claimed to be permanent
employees of Andhra Pradesh Southern Power Distribution Company
now allocated to Telangana State Northern Power Distribution Company
Ltd. The applicants question their allotment to TSNPDCL. The applicants
case is that they were not included in the employees allocated by Final
Report dated 26.12.2019. Their names have suddenly come in Concluding
Report for allocation. The applicants claimed that allocation of employees
of APSPDCL working in Kurnool and Ananthapur Districts were to be
finally allocated in terms of G.O. No.24 dated 29.05.2014 and they ought
not to have been made part of the allocation to Telangana power utilities.
The applicants prayed that their allocation to TSNPDCL be cancelled.
They prayed that letter dated 26.06.2020 submitted by APSPDCL to
One-Man Committee and approved by One-Man Committee by
Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 be got recalled and rescinded.
M.A. NO. 1290/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Transmission Corporation of
Telangana Ltd. The prayers made in the application are similar to those
made in M.A. No.1286 of 2020.
M.A. NO. 1292/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Telangana Southern Power
Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TSSPDCL). The prayers made in this
M.A. are similar to those made in M.A. No. 1286 of 2020.
M.A. NO. 1331/2020
This M.A. has been filed by the Telangana Power Generation
Corporation Ltd. (TSGENCO). The prayers made in the application
are similar to prayers made in M.A. No.1286 of 2020.
M.A. NO. 1291/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Telangana State Northern Power
Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TSNPDCL). The prayers made in the
application are similar as made in M.A. No.1286 of 2020.
M.A. NO. 1289/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Transmission Corporation of
Telangana Ltd. (TSTRANSCO). The applicants' case is that they have
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1001
been working throughout in the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh. The
applicants' names have been included in the list of 584 employees
allocated by Andhra Pradesh power utilities to be allocated to Telangana
power utilities. In pursuance of the Supplementary Report, the applicants
claimed to be relieved w.e.f. 14.03.2020 but were not permitted to join
by Telangana power utilities. The list of 584 employees submitted by
Andhra Pradesh power utilities have been approved by One-Man
Committee in the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020. The applicants
prayed that Supplementary report and Concluding Report be modified
and revised directing the respondents to accommodate the applicants in
Andhra Pradesh power utilities.
M.A. NO. 1293/2020
This M.A. has been filed by Telangana Electricity Engineers
Association & Ors. The applicants take exception to the Concluding
Report of the One-Man Committee. The applicants prayed that allocation
be restricted till Supplementary Report only by rejecting the Concluding
Report. In the M.A. applicants prayed for confirmation of allocation of
1157 employees and 242 employees made by One-Man Committee
Report dated 26.12.2019. The applicants also had pleaded that the Final
Report, Supplementary Report and Concluding Report are contradictory
to each other and are irreconcilable to the extent it goes beyond 1157
employees.
M.A. DIARY NO. 16612/2020
This M.A. Diary has been filed by Ande Jagdish and three other
Engineers seeking a direction to TSTRANSCO and APTRANSCO to
pay pension/salary to the applicants. The applicants seek direction to
implement the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 of the One-Man
Committee. The applicant also prays for being impleaded in Civil Appeal
No.11435/2018.
M.A. NO. 1631/2020
This M.A. has been filed by L. Praveenkumar Reddy and seven
other Engineers praying for a direction to Andhra Pradesh and Telangana
State utilities not to give effect the direction No.I of the Concluding
Report submitted by One-Man Committee. The applicants also prayed
for a direction to A.P. power utilities to retain the applicants as per their
options.
TELANGANA POWER GENERATION CORPORATION v. A.P. POWER
GENERATION CORPORATION LTD. [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1002
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 13 S.C.R.
M.A. DIARY NO.19295/2020
This M.A. Diary No.19295 of 2020 has been filed by Kesana
Babu Rao & 36 Ors., who claimed to be employees continued in services
on the rolls of TSGENCO till 04.01.2020 where after they were relieved
in pursuance of Final Report dated 26.12.2019 of the One-Man
Committee. The applicants claimed that they have been denied payment
of certain amounts like SGP Increments, Annual Increments, Generation
Incentives, House Rent Allowance, Conveyance allowance, Promotions
and Promotion increments, 24x7 power supply increments etc. The
applicants claimed that their further re-allotment, who presently stand
allotted to Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited as
per the Final Report dated 26.12.2019, the Supplementary Report dated
11.03.2020 and the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 of the OneMan Committee.
M.A. DIARY NO.19982/2020
This application has been filed by J.V.V. Suresh Kumar and Others
seeking similar prayers as made in M.A. Diary No.19295 of 2020.
16. We have heard Shri Mukul Rohtagi, Shri Rakesh Dwivedi,
Shri V. Giri, Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned senior counsel appearing for the
Telangana State power utilities. Shri Neeraj Kishan Kaul, learned senior
counsel has appeared on behalf of Andhra Pradesh power utilities.
Shri Dushyant Dave, learned senior counsel has appeared for Telangana
Electricity Engineers Association. We have also heard Shri
R. Balasubramanian and Shri P.V. Surendranath, learned senior counsel.
Shri Ravi Shankar Jindhiyala and other learned counsel appearing for
the parties.
17. We now proceed to notice the submissions advanced by learned
senior counsel appearing for Telangana power utilities. It is submitted
that under the judgment of this Court dated 28.11.2018 in Civil Appeal
No.11435/2018, One-Man Committee had to confine the allocation to
1157 employees only. In the Final Report dated 26.12.2019, out of 1157
employees, 655 were allocated to Andhra Pradesh power utilities and
502 to Telangana State power utilities and after allocation, no further
steps were required to be taken by One-Man Committee regarding
further allocation. The One-Man Committee has exceeded the mandate
of this Court vide order dated 24.01.2020 and substantially expanded the
exercise of allocation of employees by giving completely go-bye to Final
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1003
Report dated 26.12.2019 and modalities finalised. The ratio of 3552:2550
as given in the Concluding Report with regard to employees of Andhra
Pradesh power utilities and Telangana power utilities respectively is not
prescribed by Government Order Nos. 24, 25 and 26 except in respect
of headquarter posts. The number of total employees, i.e., 6102 as
mentioned in the Concluding Report is erroneous. The figure of 6102
employees does not take into account the employees working in two
distribution companies of Telangana, i.e., TSSPDCL and TSNPDCL.
The Telangana State power utilities were already allocated 502 out of
1157+242+71 employees as per Supplementary Report and addition of
further 584 employees as per the Concluding Report is excessive and
uncalled for. The Concluding Report of the One-Man Committee has
given a complete go-bye to the modalities, which were formulated and
approved by this Court. One-Man Committee erred in accepting the
stand of Andhra Pradesh power utilities that allocation of 655 employees
proposed by Telangana State power utilities should be on a condition of
reciprocity by the Telangana State utilities in accepting equal number of
655 employees from Andhra Pradesh power utilities. Reciprocity was
not prescribed in the modalities given by One-Man Committee as
approved by this Court. One-Man Committee erred in deviating from
modalities by issuing the Concluding Report and allocation of employees
as per principle of "financial neutrality" and "balancing of employees".
The direction given in the Supplementary Report was to identify 584
employees out of 2165 among those who fulfil the modality No.V alone.
In the list of 584 employees proposed by Andhra Pradesh power utilities,
there are only 170 employees, who are from the list of 2165 employees.
The selection of 584 employees, thus, was beyond list of 2165, which
was contrary to the Supplementary Report itself. Even the Concluding
Report is not final and was an open-ended report. As per the Concluding
Report, direction was given to Sub-Committee Member of the Andhra
Pradesh to further delete the names as per direction Nos. I, II and III
and in fact after the Concluding Report dated 20.06.2020 Sub-Committee
Member from Andhra Pradesh has released another list on 26.06.2020
by deleting 119 employees from the list of 655 employees allocated to
Andhra Pradesh and deleted 50 employees out of 484 list of employees
and further added 10 more employees to be allocated to Telangana State
on spouse ground. The report dated 20.06.2020, thus, was not even a
final report and finality of the allocation was permitted to be unsettled by
A.P.