Telangana High Court
WP/26297/2006 of G. Krishna Murthy, Vs The Superintending Engineer, on 27 December 2006
SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 26297 of 2006 Date: 27.12.2006 Between: G. Krishna Murthy. ..... PETITIONER AND The Superintending Engineer, A.P. Northern Power Distribution Co. Ltd., Khammam and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No. 26297
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
Writ Petition No. 26297 of 2006
Date: 27.12.2006
Between:G. Krishna Murthy.
ANDThe Superintending Engineer,A.P. Northern Power Distribution Co. Ltd.,Khammam and another.
..... PETITIONER
.....RESPONDENTS
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANAWrit Petition No. 26297 of 2006
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order:
By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to direct the respondent-APNPDCL to treat his appointment as Helper from 1985 instead of1993, by taking the service rendered by him as Ex-Casual Labour, andfix the seniority with all consequential benefits by disposing of therepresentation dated 25.10.2006, filed in reply to the revised seniority listdated 08.01.2006.
The petitioner states that earlier he worked as Casual Labour inthe respondent-APNPDCL, and when his case was not considered forabsorption, he filed W.P. No. 12262 of 1992, and in pursuance of theorders passed by this Court in that Writ Petition No. 12262 of 1992,dated 24.09.1992, his case was considered and he was appointed asHelper in the year 1993. Now the case of the petitioner is that similarlysituated persons, who are juniors to him and worked as Casual Labour,were appointed as Helpers in the year 1983 and though he is alsolegally and legitimately entitled to be considered as Helper in the year1983 itself, because of the arbitrary action of the respondent-APNPDCL,whereby without verifying the records driven him to this Court for thepurpose of appointment, he lost number of years of service. His furthercase is that though he made representation on 25.10.2006 seeking totreat his appointment as Helper from 1985 instead of 1993, by taking theservice rendered by him as Ex-Casual Labour, and fix his seniority, therespondent-APNPDCL has not taken any action so far. Hence, he filedthe present writ petition.
When the matter came up for admission on 20.12.2006, this Court passed the following order:
“The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that inpursuance of the orders of this Court, the respondent-APNPDCL, vide memo dated 21.01.2006, communicated therevised seniority list of junior Linemen, in which cadre thepetitioner is also working, calling for objections/discrepancies tothe said seniority list, and according to the petitioner, he hassubmitted his explanation to the said seniority list, but so far therespondent-APNPDCL have not considered the same.
The petitioner neither filed any such explanation copy norproduced any material before this Court to show that he hasraised any objection or submitted his explanation to the saidshow cause notice. The petitioner filed copy of seniority list ofjunior linemen of operation division, Khammam as on31.08.2005, stating that his name is not found in the finalseniority list. The petitioner is not sure whether the said list isfinal seniority list or not. It is his oral contention that it is the finalseniority list.
In the circumstances, to verify the facts, the 2[nd] respondent isdirected to appear in-person before this Court on 27.12.2006along with relevant material i.e., the objections, if any, submittedby the petitioner to the said show cause notice and the finalseniority list, if any, passed by him. List the matter for appearance and for orders on 27.12.2006.”
Today, when the matter is taken up, the Divisional Engineerconcerned has appeared in-person and produced relevant record. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned StandingCounsel for the respondent-APNPDCL.
A perusal of the record produced by the Divisional Engineer ofthe respondent-APNPDCL clearly shows that on 12.09.2005 a draftprovisional seniority list of Junior Linemen was prepared by therespondents, and after taking into consideration the objections raised bythe persons in the said list, again a revised provisional seniority list wasprepared on 21.01.2006 and granted some more time calling forobjections, if any. Since no objections have been received fromanybody, final seniority list was published on 31.03.2006. Thepetitioner neither made any representation nor raised any objection toany one of the said seniority lists. So, the seniority list published on 31.03.2006 became final. Thereafter, the respondent-APNPDCL onceagain issued another provisional seniority list of Junior Linemen as on25.11.2006 to consider their cases for further promotions and granted 15days time to submit their objections/discrepancies, if any. According tothe petitioner as well as the respondent-APNPDCL, the respondent-APNPDCL has not received any objections from the petitioner.
Since the petitioner neither submitted any representation norraised any objection to any one of the seniority lists published by therespondent-APNPDCL on 12.09.2005, 21.01.2006 and 31.03.2006respectively, now he cannot be allowed to claim that his seniority has tobe counted from the year 1985 onwards by taking the service renderedby him as Ex-Casual Labour, more so when he was appointed asHelper in the year 1993 pursuant to the orders of this Court.
The writ petition is devoid of merit and the same is accordinglydismissed. No costs.
___________________
N.V. RAMANA, J.