IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 6447 OF 2024 Between: Potharaju Suresh Babu, S/o. Janardhana Rao, aged about 47 years, Occ; Hostel Welfare Officer Gr-ll, O/o. Govt. B.C.Hostel (Boys), Mudinepalli, Eluru District. R/o. Mudinepalli Village and Mandal, Eluru District-521325. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal Secretary, BC Welfare Department, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Director, BC Welfare Department, Vishal Residency, Padmaja Nagar, Tadigadapa, Vijayawada. 3. The District Backward Classes Welfare Officer, Krishna District, Machilipatnam. 4. The District Collector, Krishna District at Machilipatnam. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the Proceedings in Rc.No.A1/21/2012, dt.26.04.2024 of the 4*^ respondent is rejected the request of the petitioner for notional promotion as Hostel welfare Officer Grade-ll (Warden) from 01.07.2006 instead of 16.11.2012 on par with his Junior is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and violation of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the orders dt.09.02.2012 passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal in * O.A.No.1843/2009 and O.A.No.8559 of 2011 and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner notional promotion as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-ll from 01.07.2006 'instead of 16.11.2012 on par with my junior and further promoted as Hostel welfare Officer Grade-1 as per his eligibility and seniority with ail - consequential benefits. (Main prayer is amended as per Court’s Order dated: 20.03.2025 in lA No.2 of 2024) ..‘m " ..o lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the Proceedings in Rc.No.A1/21/2012, dt.26.04.2024 of the 4*^ respondent and consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for notional promotion as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-ll from 01.07.2006 instead of 16.11.2012 on par with my junior and further promoted as Hostel welfare Officer Grade-1 as per his eligibility and seniority. (Interim Prayer is amended as per the Court’s Order dated: 20.03.2025 in lA No.2 of 2024) lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the Proceedings in Rc.No.A1/21/2012, dt.26.04.2024 of the 4 respondent and consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for notional promotion as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-ll from 01.07.2006 instead of 16.11.2012 on par with my junior and further promoted as Hostel welfare Officer Grade-1 as per his eligibility and seniority. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G. SRINIVASULA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: ORDER th APHC010123822024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 6447/2024 Between: ...PETITIONER Potharaju Suresh Babu AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.G SRINIVASULA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “ to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Proceedings in Rc.No.A1/21/2012, dt.26.04,2024, of the 4'^ respondent is rejected the request of the petitioner for notional promotion as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-ll (Warden) from 01.07.2006, instead of 16.11.2012 on par with his Junior, is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and violative of the principles of natural justice and contrary to the Orders, dated 09.02.2012 passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal in O.A.No. 1843/2009 and O.A.No.8559 of 2011 and set aside the same and consequently, direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for notional promotion as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-ll from 01.07.2006 instead of 16.11.2012 on par with his junior and further CGR, J, W.P.No.6447 of 2024 promoted as Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-1, as per his eligibility and seniority with all consequential benefits and to pass....” Petitioner was initially appointed as Attender and upon 2. regularisation of his services, he was entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-11 (Warden). Though, petitioner was eligible and qualified for being promoted to the said post, he was not considered rather his juniors came to be promoted. Petitioner filed O.A.No.1843 of 2009 and O.A.No.8559 of 2011 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, which came to be disposed by order, dated 09.02.2012, directing respondents to examine whether junior to petitioner namely Sri Md.Shahatulla, being junior, and promoted to the post of Hostel Welfare Officer Grade-11 (Warden), the petitioner, if qualified and eligible as on 01.07.2006 to hold the said post, respondents were to extend the benefit of notional promotion from the date of promotion as given to the unofficial respondent. The 4^'^ respondent by proceedings, dated 14.11.2012 promoted petitioner on ad hoc basis as Hostel Welfare Officer. Though the Tribunal directed respondents to examine whether if the unofficial respondent was junior to petitioner and if the said person has been promoted, the petitioner also to be extended the benefit of granting notional promotion from the said date i.e. 01.07.2006, the said aspect has not been considered or dealt with in the aforesaid -'■‘X CGR, J. W.P.No.6447of2024 Petitioner, subsequently, made representations to the respondents for considering his notional seniority, as the same are not attended, he filed the present writ petition. order. Pending writ petition, this Court passed interim orders directing the respondents 2 and 4 to consider the latest representation submitted by the petitioner. The 4*'' respondent passed speaking order, by proceedings, dated 26.04.2024, rejecting the request of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner has not preferred appeal within the prescribed period of 90 days from the date of promotion effected to his junior. The order does not deal with the directions given by the Tribunal and on mere technicalities, the representation came to be 3. rejected. Heard Sri G.Srinivasula Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-ll appearing for the respondents. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the Tribunal has passed orders, specifically directing the respondents to examine whether junior to petitioner was granted promotion with effect from 01.07.2006 and if petitioner was senior to him and otherwise eligible for consideration of promotion, he be extended the 5. CGR, J. W,P,No.6447of 2024 benefit of notional promotion, ignoring the same, 4*'' respondent merely promoted petitioner on ad hoc basis by proceedings, dated Even now in the impugned speaking order, dated 26.04.2024, the 4‘'^ respondent does not adhere to the directions issued by the Tribunal, therefore, the respondents are deliberately denying the petitioner the notional promotion. 14.11.2012. Opposing the aforesaid submissions, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-ll appearing for the respondents, contended that petitioner since has not preferred Appeal within 90 days of his junior being promoted, any consideration at this point of time would be beyond limitation period and at any rate, petitioner is not entitled for the relief as claimed. 6. 7. The Tribunal, considering the applications at the instance of the very same petitioner, passed the following order: “In the light of the above circumstances, the O.A. is disposed of directing the respondents to examine whether the unofficial respondent is junior to the applicant and if so, if the applicant is fully qualified and eligible as on 1.7.2006 to hold the post of Hostel Officer Gr.ll (Warden), the respondents are directed to extend the benefit of notional promotion to the applicant to the post of Hostel Officer Gr.ll (Warden) from the date of promotion given to the 5*^ unofficial respondent with all consequential benefits. The respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders in this CGR, W.P.No.6447 of 2024 regard within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order,” The 4*^^ respondent admittedly has only extended ad hoc 8. promotion to the petitioner, by proceedings, dated 14.11.2012, and has not examined the case of the petitioner in terms of aforesaid directions passed by the Tribunal. Though petitioner has been making repeated representations, even now, the respondents have not considered his case for notional promotion. As already the Tribunal has given specific directions, the respondents are bound to follow and examine the case of the petitioner with reference to the said directions. In view of the same, the impugned order of rejection, dated 26.04.2024, passed by the 4*'^ respondent is hereby set aside and is 9. directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner with reference to the directions issued by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by orders, dated 09.02.2012, passed in O.A.No.1843 of 2009 and O.A.No.8559 of 2011, and pass appropriate speaking order within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to 10. costs. 6 CGR, J W.P.No.6447 of 2024 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. Sd/- M. SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal Secretary, BC Welfare Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. The Director, BC Welfare Department, Vishal Residency, Padmaja Nagar, Tadigadapa, Vijayawada. The District Backward Classes Welfare Officer, Krishna District, Machilipatnam. The District Collector, Krishna District at Machilipatnam. One CC to Sri G. Srinivasula Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Services- II, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] Three CD Copies. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:27/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.6447 of 2024 DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS