WP/20748/2001 of Mohd. Basheeruddin Vs A.P. Society for Training and Employment Promotion on 28 December 2012

ORDER:

Heard Sri P.Ramabrahmam, the learned Counsel appearing forthe petitioner and Sri Gangula Ashok Kumar Reddy, the learnedstanding counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 4 and thelearned Government Pleader for other respondents.

In this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a mandamus or anyother appropriate writ, for a direction to the first respondent to consider and promote him as Record Assistant on par with his juniors. Additionally, he is also seeking a direction to respondents torectify the existing irregularities and take corrective measures as perGovernment’s memo No.6841/SES&PMU/A1/99-1, dt.19.11.1999issued to first respondent and to prepare a correct seniority list.

The petitioner was admittedly appointed on 08.05.1990 by thethird respondent as a Watchman and subsequently he was convertedas Attender with effect from 31.05.1991 and he was regularized in thatpost on 01.06.1991.

The petitioner’s grievance is, though the fifth respondent is junior to the petitioner, he was promoted as Attender and therefore, thepetitioner ought to have been considered for promotion as RecordAssistant even prior to the promotion of the fifth respondent. Thespecific case of the petitioner is that there is a vacancy of RecordAssistant in Karimnagar District and since he is the senior most, he iseligible for promotion to that post, but he has been wrongly denied thatpromotion.

The first respondent initially filed a counter affidavit and he alsofiled an additional counter affidavit. Its main case is that there is novacant post of Record Assistant in Karimnagar District and that it hasalready been abolished along with fifteen other posts by theGovernment through their memo No.3852/SES/2002-2,dt.04.07.2002. This is disputed by Sri P.Ramabrahmam, the learnedcounsel for the petitioner and he says that his instructions are, still thepost is in existence and it is vacant. Today, Sri Gangula Ashok KumarReddy, the learned standing counsel for respondents 1 and 4, filed acopy of letter dt.27.12.2012, addressed to him by the ManagingDirector of APSTEP and Director of Youth Services, to the effect thatthe Record Assistant post in Karimnagar District has been abolishedalong with certain other posts.

I am of the opinion that this letter can be acted upon, as it showsthat the post has been abolished by the Government themselves. This is the first minus point for the petitioner and shows that since the postitself is abolished, he cannot claim any right of promotion or promotionitself to the said post.

It may also be noted that the first respondent in his counter hasmentioned that the fifth respondent was wrongly promoted andsubsequently, the District Collector, Nalgonda, issued an order on21.01.2003 reverting the fifth respondent to the post of Attender, on thevarious grounds mentioned therein. It is also stated by the firstrespondent that the seniority list has to be prepared. Since the fifthrespondent has been reverted in the year 2003, the petitioner cannotmake out a case by way of comparison and this is the second minuspoint for the petitioner.

It is true that the petitioner has been working as an Attenderfrom 31.05.1991 and it is also now reported by Sri P.Rambrahmam,learned Counsel for the petitioner, that the petitioner retired fromservice on 29.02.2012. Thus in the above circumstances this Courttherefore cannot interfere in this matter. For these reasons it is notnecessary to go into the question, whether the post of record assistantis a District Cadre post or a state wide post in this case.

This writ petition should therefore fail and it is accordinglydismissed. No costs.

The miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

Date: 28.12.2012gra

________________

N.RAVI SHANKAR, J