APHC010157572021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] MONDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 9085/2021 Between: 1. MODIYAM VENKATESU,, S/O. SREERAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC- LFL HEAD. MASTER MPPS, KAMMARIGUDEM (A), KUKNOOR MANDAL WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, AMARAVATRHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, , GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, IBRAHIMPATNAM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. SRI TEJAVATH GIRI BHAGAVANDAS, S/O JAGANNADHAM, OCC. HEAD MASTER, Z.P.HIGH SCHOOL, AMARAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to issue appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No. 4 in issuing reversion order under proceedings in 2 Rc.No.4087/B4/2019 Dt.29-03- 2021 from the post of Head Master Grade-II , Z.P. High School Amaravaram, West Godavari District, is bad, arbitrary, without competence and jurisdiction and un-constitutional, clear violation of Art. 14, 16, and 21 of Constitution of India and also contrary to Rule 23 of A.P. State and Subordinate Senrice Rules 1996 and consequently direct the Respondents no. 3 and 4 to restore petitioner position as Gazetted Head Master (Grade-II) , ZPHS, Amaravaram, Kuknoor Mandal, West Godavari District by set-aside the proceedings in Rc.No.4087/B4/2019 Dt.29-03- 2021 issued by R.No. 4 IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 pleased to suspend the operation of order under proceedings in Rc.No.4087/B4/2019, Dt.29-03-2021 issued by Respondent no. 4, pending disposal of the main writ petition IA NO: 2 OF 2021 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 pleased to receive and treat the present additional affidavit as part and parcel of the WP and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. PAMARTHY RATHNAKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES II 2. PALEM LAKSHMI PRIYA The Court made the following: ORDER:- Heard Sri Pamarthy Rathnakar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services II appearing for the 1st to 4th respondents and Ms. Palem Lakshmi Priya, learned counsel for the 5threspondent. 3 2. The petitioner was promoted as Gazetted Headmaster Gr-II in Z.P.P.High School, Amaravaram, West Godavari District vide proceedings of the 3rd respondent. Both the petitioner and the unofficial 5th respondent, who worked as a School Assistant at the very same school, participated in the counseling held for the post of Headmaster. The 5th respondent's candidature was not considered, as he did not produce the Local Agency Certificate. In the said vacancy the petitioner’s case was considered for promotion as Headmaster Gr-II, after waiting for the 5th respondent to submit the Local Agency Certificate issued by the appropriate authority. The 5th respondent filed a writ petition in W.P.No.11243 of 2019, challenging the action of the respondents in not granting promotion to him as Headmaster Gr-II. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider the case of the unofficial respondent for promotion to the post of Headmaster Gr-II in the existing vacancy within four (4) weeks from the date of receiving the order. 3. It is contended by the petitioner that the said order was passed under misrepresentation of facts by the unofficial respondent who portrayed as if there was one vacancy, and the 5th respondent herein prayed for a direction to consider his case in the remaining one vacancy. It is stated that there were no vacancies as on the date of the order passed in W.P.No.11243 of 2019. To comply with the directions issued in W.P.No.11243 of 2019, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner calling for his objections as to why he should not be reverted. Challenging the show-cause notice, the 4 petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.7292 of 2021. The petitioner submitted an explanation in response to the show-cause notice. It is contended that without considering such explanation, a reversion order was passed stating that it was necessary to comply with the directions in W.P.No.11243 of 2019. The petitioner herein was accordingly reverted. 4. It is contended that the relief sought in W.P.No.11243 of 2019 was to consider the case of the petitioner therein for promotion to the post of Headmaster Gr-II, in the existing vacancy. The direction in the writ petition was also to consider the case of the petitioner to the post of panel grade Headmaster Gr-II, in the existing vacancy, if available. It is further contended that the order in the writ petition was passed to consider the case of the petitioner / 5th respondent in the existing vacancy strictly in accordance with law, subject to verification of the certificate produced by the petitioner, without passing appropriate orders as directed by the Court, incompliance to the order passed in the writ petition W.P.No.11243 of 2019, the impugned order is passed without considering the explanation of the petitioner. 5. The 5th respondent filed counter affidavit stating that the seniority list was prepared in the category of School Assistants on 01.07.2019, however, his promotion was not considered, on the ground that the Local Agency Certificate produced was not obtained from the West Godavari District, where he has been working. Since his case was rejected on the said ground, he approached this High Court and filed the writ petition and this Court directed the 4th respondent to consider his case for promotion in the 5 existing vacancy. Since the direction was not complied with and the writ petitioner was proposed to the said vacancy, he filed a contempt case in C.C.No.884 of 2019. It is further contended by the 5th respondent that this Court while disposing of the contempt case observed that the respondents have filled up the vacancy, without taking into consideration of the Local Agency Certificate produced by the 5th respondent herein, promoted deliberately, the writ petitioner herein. It is further contended by the respondents that the writ petitioner in the writ petition only challenged the reversion proceedings issued in his case, without challenging the proceedings of promotion of the 5th respondent. 6. Considered the rival submissions. 7. This Court, while disposing of the writ petition (W.P.No.11243 of 2019) at the admission stage, taking note of the fact that there was one existing vacancy for the post of Headmaster Gr-II, directed the respondents to consider the case of the 5th respondent herein in the said vacancy, holding that the certificate produced by the 5threspondent at the time of counselling held on 03.07.2019, which was the certificate issued by the Revenue department of the Khammam District, erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh, as valid one. On 16.09.2019, the 4th respondent passed orders stating that since the 5th respondent failed to submit the Local Agency Certificate issued by the appropriate authority after waiting for two weeks, the case of the writ petitioner herein was considered for promotion. Therefore, observing that the direction in the writ petition was to consider the case of the petitioner in the existing 6 vacancy as on the date of the order in the writ petition, since there was no vacancy, the case of the 5threspondent herein would be considered only in the next vacancy, as per his eligibility. In the contempt case filed in the said regard, this Court has observed that the respondents deliberately did not consider the case of the petitioner, the 5th respondent herein and granted promotion to the writ petitioner herein. Pursuant to the observations made in the Contempt Case, the respondents passed the impugned proceedings and promoted the 5th respondent herein as Headmaster Gr-II. 8. The earlier direction of this Court was to receive the Local Agency Certificate produced by the petitioner issued from the Khammam District as valid one, in the light of the same, although, even if it is construed that this Court was not appraised of the fact that there was no vacancy as on the date of the passing of the order, however, the direction of this Court was to receive and accept the Local Agency Certificate obtained from Khammam District of erstwhile composite State of A.P.., has become final,. This Court’s direction on the merits of the issue, as to the validity of the Local Agency Certificate issued by the Revenue Department of Khammam District of erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh has become final. The direction was to the effect that the certificate produced by the 5th respondent herein should be considered as valid one. The direction of this Court in W.P.No.11243 of 2019, which has become final is to the following effect: “3. Considering these peculiar circumstances, in as much as there appears to be no dispute as to the social status of the petitioner as S.T. candidate and as there is the certificate issued by the authorities of 7 Khammam District of erstwhile composite State of Andhra Pradesh, the 1st respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Panel Grade Head Master Grade-II in the existing vacancy strictly following all the Rules as well as in accordance with law, subject to verification of the certificate produced by the petitioner, within four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 9. In the light of the same, the order impugned in the writ petition has rightly been passed, if the certificate of social status submitted by the unofficial 5th respondent was considered a valid one, the petitioner who is junior in the seniority, to the 5th respondent, would not be entitled for promotion, even before the 5th respondent case is considered. 10. In the light of the foregoing, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date:28.07.2025 ANI 8 253 THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION No.9085 of 2021 Date:28.07.2025 ANI