Andhra Pradesh split was not to break up marriages: Hyderabad High Court
Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court said on Friday that the import and intent of bifurcation of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh was not to break up marriages.
The court made this somewhat unusual observation when dealing with the case of the principal of a government college who challenged her allocation to Telangana State though she had opted for Andhra Pradesh under the spouse category as her husband works in BHEL in Visakhapatnam.
Dr S. Shoba Rani was appointed as lecturer at Kurnool in Zone IV on July 20, 1992. She was thereafter transferred to Visakhapatnam in Zone I on her own request, as her husband working at BHEL in Visakhapatnam. She thereupon took the last rank in terms of seniority in the cadre of lecturers at Visakhapatnam.
The Centre informed the High Court that her request for retention in Zone I under spouse category could not be considered as her husband was employed in BHEL, which is a Central Government Public Sector Undertaking.
A division bench comprising Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar and Justice N. Balayogi, while allowing her plea, pointed out that merely because Clause (l) of the guidelines for allocation of employees between the successor States of Telangana and AP does not mention employees working in Central Government Public Sector Undertakings, it does not mean that spouses of such employees, who are working in the state cadre, are not to be accommodated.
The bench noted that any shortfall in the guidelines in this regard cannot be taken literally to mean that spouses, whose cases do not fall within the four corners of the instructions set out, are to be left out in the cold and must suffer marital separation.
The basic principle underlying these guidelines is to protect and keep together employed spouses who would otherwise be separated pursuant to the bifurcation. The guidelines should be implemented keeping the spirit and intent underlying them in mind, the court held.
The bench said in the present case, the husband of the petitioner is working in a non-transferable post in BHEL and her children are also studying there and significantly, she has already suffered loss of seniority earlier to keep her family together.
The bench said Clause (l) of the guidelines states in no uncertain terms that allocation shall, as far as practicable, be made so as to keep the spouses together. The authorities therefore have to conceive, formulate and implement the guidelines keeping this in mind.
The bench observed that this being the factual situation, the action of the authorities in turning a blind eye to her plight and her fervent request for allocation to Visakhapatnam cannot be countenanced. The bench directed the authorities to allocate her to Andhra Pradesh.
