Will set aside CAT order allocating 13 AIS officers to State: High Court

Telangana HC adjourns hearing of batch of pleas challenging CAT order allocating 13 AIS officers to Telangana. Bench noted that it would set aside the order and remand the matter back to Centre to re-examine in its entirety. Centre to assess each case individually, taking into consideration the service period of officers. Hearing adjourned to Jan 2.

Observing that it would set aside the order of Central Administrative Tribunal allocating 13 All India Service officers to Telangana, the Telangana High Court on Tuesday adjourned to January 2 the hearing of the batch of writ petitions filed by the Centre challenging that order.

A Bench of Justices Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao made the observation noting that it would set aside the allotment of officers as the courts cannot perform the duty of appellate authority of allotting them amongst the States. The Bench was hearing the batch of pleas filed by the Department of Personnel and Training of the Union Ministry of Home Affairs questioning the CAT order passed in 2016.

The Bench also noted that it would remand the matter back to the Central government so that the issue of re-allocation of officers in the backdrop of carving out Telangana from unified Andhra Pradesh would be re-examined in its entirety. The Centre would be asked to assess each case individually.

The Union of India should also take into consideration the fact that most of the officers continuing in Telangana had completed nearly 10 years of service, the Bench said. Majority of them were nearing completion of their service. The Centre would consider the remaining service period of the officers and depending upon merits would give separate hearing of each matter.

Senior counsel K. Lakshmi Narasimha, appearing for one of the AIS officers, opposed the observation of the Bench of setting aside the CAT order. He appealed to the Bench to hear each petition of the officers separately. He also objected to the decision of the Centre to challenge the decision of the CAT.

He informed the Bench that since the Advocate General had resigned in the backdrop of the change of guard at the State government, the matter needed to be adjourned. Senior counsels representing other AIS officers too agreed with the contention following which the Bench adjourned the hearing to January 2.