ORDER
1. The writ petition is filed for a direction to respondents 2 and 3 not to revert the petitioner from the post in Category V to a post in Category VIII todirect the 3rd respondent not to give effect to the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Re. No.42448 of 1989 Cr. 1(B) dated 9-10-1989 and to further direct the 3rd respondent to send the petitioner for co-operative training as per the appointment order dated 22-8-1989.
2. The petitioner is the daughter of one K. Venkat Reddy who was working as Branch Manager of the 3rd respondent-bank. He died on 1-3-1989. The petitioner sought an appointment as Cashier or Clerk in Category V in accordance with the instructions issued by the Government in G.O. Ms. No.623, Food and Agriculture Department, dated 26-10-1978. The 3rd respondent issued order dated 22-8-1989 temporarily appointing her as Shroff in Category V in Markapur Branch. She was required to produce the original certificates in support of her educational qualifications and also give an undertaking that she would undergo co-operative training successfully at her cost within a period of three years from the date of her joining. The petitioner joined duty on 25-8-1989. The General Manager of the third respondent-bank sought exemption from the 2nd respondent, as there was ban on appointments on the co-operative central banks. In response thereto, the 2nd respondent sent a communication on 9-10-1989 permitting the third respondent to appoint the petitioner to a post in Category VIII on compassionate grounds. Aggrieved by the communication of the 2nd respondent permitting appointment of the petitioner to a post in Category VIII instead of to the post of Shroff in Category V, the writ petition is filed.
3. The 2nd respondent filed a counter-affidavit. It is submitted by the 2nd respondent that for the post of Clerks/ supervisors and other posts in Category V the minimum educational qualification is a degree of any recognised university andco-operative training. In the case of paid-Secretaries who are permitted to the post in Category V in the ration of 9:1 the qualification is intermediate, with full term of short-term course of co-operative training. It is also stated that the 3rd respondent appointed the petitioner contrary to the instructions issued by the 2nd respondent in regard to educational qualifications for the post in Category V and the Registrar issued a letter dated 11-5-1990 requesting the 3rd respondent to terminate the services of the petitioner in Category V and appoint her to a post in Category VIII to which the petitioner is eligible as the petitioner passed intermediate examination. The Registrar has also requested the 3rd respondent to recover the difference of salary from the date of her original appointment to Category V to the date of termination. The petitioner is not eligible to a post in Category V with reference to the qualifications and, therefore, the appointment of the petitioner as Shroff is contrary to the instructions issued by the 2nd issued by the 2nd respondent in proceedings Re. 5199 of 1979 C1(a) dated 15-3-1979.
4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri Vijayachandra Reddy representing Sri R. Vijayanandan Reddy submits that the qualifications prescribed for appointment to the post in Category V is intermediate with junior co-operative training and, therefore, the allegations made in the counter affidavit are not true and that even as per the Circular Memorandum of the 2nd respondent, a person with intermediate and co-operative training is eligible for being appointed to the post in Category V. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has not produced any service bye-laws of the third respondent-society.
5. The point for consideration, therefore, is whether the letter dated 9-10-1989 issued by the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitionerto a post in Category VIII on compassionate grounds is valid?
6. The first respondent herein issued orders in G.O. Ms. No.623 Food and Agriculture (Co-operative IV) Department, dated 26-10-1978 providing for employment procedure in favour of the dependents of the deceased employees of the co-operative societies. In this order, the Government directed that a son/daughter or the spouse of the deceased employee of the Co-operative Society/Agricultural Development Banks who died in harness may be appointed to the category to which he/she is eligible for appointment as per the rules without the medium of Employment Exchange subject to certain conditions. The appointment is to be made to a post in particular category to which the candidate is eligible as per rules.
7. In co-operative sector Primary Agricultural Development Banks (PADBs) provided long-terms loans and District Cooperative Centra! Banks (DCCBs) provided short-term loans. The former came to be known as long-term structure of co-operative financing and the latter came to be known as short-term co-operative structure of cooperative financing. Both were different streams. By A.P. Co-operative Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987 (Act 1 of 1987) long-term co-operative banks and short-terms co-operative banks are sought to be merged by abolition of PADBs. and absorption of employees of those banks in the service of DCCBs. Accordingly the PADBs., stood abolished as per the Amendment Act 1 of 1987 with effect from 1-4-1987. However, the modalities for merger of the service came to be finalised and Rule 73 of the A.P. Co-operative Societies Rules, 1964 was amended in G.O. Ms. No.132, dated 3-3-1983 and G.O. Ms. No.212, dated 7-5-1994 effecting actual merger from the date of the order to be passed by the General Manager of the DCCBs.
8. Be that as it may, when the modalilies of merger and integration of the services of the employees of erst-while PADBs., with the services of the DCCB was questioned in D. V. V. Satyaprasad v. Government of A.P., : 1996(1)ALT390 (DB), a Division Benchof this Court noticed the following qualifications for the posts of Clerk/Supervisor/Typist in Category V in short-term structure (DCCBs).
9. State showing qualifications, duties etc., of Long-Term and Short-Term cadres as on 1-4-1987.
PADB (LT)DCCB (ST)
CadreMethod of appointmentQualifications CadreMethod of appointmentQualifications
X X XX X XSupervisor(a) By promotion3 years as Typist & Co-op. TrainingSupervisor (a) By promotion (90% paid-Secretarries, 10% others in DCCB)HSC & Co-op, Training(b) By directrecruitmentIntermediate &Diploma; in Co-op. or Degree in Commerce(b) By directrecruitmentGraduate with Co-op. Training.X X X
10. Keeping in view the relevant bye-laws which governed the service conditions in PADBs. and DCCBs., the 2nd respondent issued the Circular Memorandum dated 12-9-1990. The relevant paragraph relied on by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner reads as under:
'The minimum educational qualifications for the post of Category V i.e., Supervisors, Clerks and Cashiers etc., is graduation having passed Co-operative training successfully in case of employees in short-term structure while it is Intermediate with Co-operative training in case of employees in long-term structure. The appointments on compassionate grounds are to be regulated with reference to the provisions of short-term or long-term service regulations in whichever structure thevacancy arises consequent on the demise of an employee, until common service regulations are framed and approved consequent to integration of services of short-term and long-term employees. However, in the case of appointments on compassionate grounds, the cooperative training is to be completed by the candidate at the cost of the bank after such appointment within a period of three years as per the Circular eighth cited.'
11. Therefore, for the post of Cashier/ Shroff in DCCB by way of direct recruitment the minimum educational qualification required in graduation with co-operative training. The only relaxation given in the case of compassionate appointment is that a candidate has to complete co-operative training within a period of three yearsafter the appointment at the cost of the bank, that is to say, at the time of appointment on compassionate ground a candidate shall only have to satisfy the minimum educational qualification of having graduation. Therefore, the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that Intermediate qualification is sufficient cannot be countenanced.
12. Further as per the averments made in the affidavit accompanying the writ petition, the father of the petitioner worked as Branch Manager in DCCB and died on 1-3-1989. This shows that the father of the petitioner was working as Manager of DCCB (short-term structure) and as per the memo dated 12-9-1990; the appointment on compassionate grounds is to be regulated with reference to the provisions of short-term structure as the vacancy has arisen consequent on the demise of the petitioner's father in short-term structure. The learned Counsel for the petitioner is not able to dispute this position. Therefore, when the third respondent requested the 2nd respondent to grant relaxation to appoint the petitioner having regard to the ban on appointments, the 2nd respondent issued the communication dated 9-10-1989 authorising appointment of petitioner on compassionate ground to the post in Category VIII. There is no infirmity in the said communication. Even before the 3rd respondent could take any action pursuant to the order issued by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner has approached this Court and obtained an interim order on 16-7-1990. The petitioner admittedly has passed only Intermediate and, therefore, she is not eligible for being appointed to the post in Category V in Markapur Branch. The order passed by the 3rd respondent on 22-8-1989 is an illegal order contrary to the service bye-laws. Therefore, the 2nd respondent was justified in permitting the third respondent to appoint the petitioner only to the post in Category VIII on compassionate grounds.
13. For the above reasons, the writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.1,000/-.