APHC010217792005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 20395/2005 Between: P. Subrahmanyam & 16 Others and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Tirupathi ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. V JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondent: 1. A PRABHAKAR SARMA SC FOR TTD The Court made the following order: Impugning the proceedings vide Roc.No.E5/12836/2005 dated 17.08.2005 issued by the respondent-TTD, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Heard Sri K.Koutilya, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri A.Prabhakar Sarma, learned Standing counsel for respondent-TTD. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the contents of the affidavit contended that, the petitioners herein were engaged during the year 1986-87 as volunteers to discharge the duties of Packers in Srivari temple, TTDs at Tirumala and they were regularized in the Attender’s scale by the respondent-TTD vide proceedings dated 01.08.1991 (by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.391 dated 06.05.1991). While so, the respondent had issued proceedings dated 14.05.2001 changing the date of absorption of the petitioners and others, who were absorbed initially w.e.f. 01.08.1991 as 06.05.1991. He further submitted that, the Government have issued G.O.Ms.No.479 dated 17.07.2004 according the permission to Respondent to re-designate all the volunteers cadre who are absorbed in terms of G.O.Ms.No.391 dated 06.05.1991 as Attenders w.e.f. 06.05.1991 duly extending all other consequential benefits, but fixation of their seniority in the cadre of Attenders shall be subject to the disposal of W.P.No.17403/2003 filed by TTD Class IV employees Union of TTDs. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that, similarly situated employees like that of petitioners, who were absorbed as packers in TTDs prior to the absorption of the petitioners were treated as Attenders and promoted as Assistant/Shroff by virtue of proceedings dated 11.09.1992. In the said circumstances, the petitioners have made a representation to the respondent (TTD) to consider them for promotion, by treating them as Attenders cadre, as has been done in respect of similarly situated persons. As the authorities have not considered their case for promotion, the petitioners have constrained to file W.P.No.10230 of 2005 before this Court and this Court was pleased to dispose of the said writ petition directing the respondent to take appropriate decision in accordance with the rules and regulation, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Pursuant to the said order, the respondent (TTD) has issued impugned proceedings vide Roc.No.E5/12836/2005 dated 17.08.2005 and rejected the petitioners case stating that, there is no such provision in the service rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.1060 dated 24.10.1989. Learned counsel for the petitioners would further submit that, there was no cadre of Paditharam Carrier/Packer existing in the TTDs Service Rules even at the time of the absorption of the petitioners in the Attender scale by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.391 dated 06.05.1991 who are engaged on volunteer basis in TTDs. While so, those who were appointed prior to the petitioners in the said non-existing cadre of packer, who initially appointed on NMR basis were promoted to Assistant/Shroff cadre vide orders dated 11.09.1992. He would further submit that, the case of the similarly situated employees were considered by the respondent TTD and they were promoted to Assistant/Shroff cadre but the case of the petitioners was denied vide impugned proceedings dated 17.08.2005, though they are having requisite qualification and by virtue of the same, the petitioners would lose promotion along with other benefits. If the said impugned proceedings are allowed to subsist, it not only amounts to discrimination but also the rights of the petitioners guaranteed under Article 14 of the constitution would be affected. As such prayed to pass appropriate orders on the ground of parity protecting the interest of the petitioners. 4. On the other hand, learned standing counsel for TTD on counter contended that, in so far as petitioner nos.1,9,10,14 and 17 are concerned, they were converted into office subordinates, 16th petitioner has converted into LPG Gas Operator, petitioner nos.4 & 15 were died and petitioner nos.6,7 & 13 were retired. In view of the same, only the case of the petitioner nos.2,3,5,8,11 &12 falls for consideration. Learned standing counsel would submit that, the petitioners were appointed in Packers post, for which there is no promotion channel as per rules of TTD and so far as employees whom the petitioners are referring are concerned, they were engaged as NMRs and absorbed as Attenders and since Attenders have promotion channel, they were promoted as Assistant/Shroffs. As such, the petitioners cannot compare their case with those referred persons and claim right for promotion. The respondent had rightly passed impugned proceedings rejecting their case and therefore there is no illegality or procedural irregularity in passing the said impugned proceedings. The petitioners have not made any case warranting the interference of this Court and the writ petition deserves dismissal and accordingly prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that, all the petitioners, who are still in the post of packers, are left with only 5 years of service and they would make a fresh representation to the respondent TTD and prayed for a direction to dispose of their representation in accordance with law. 6. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties. 7. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were engaged as Paditharam Carriers/Packers during the year 1986-87 and they were regularized in the Attender’s scale by the respondent-TTD vide proceedings dated 01.08.1991 (by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.391 dated 06.05.1991). It is also not in dispute that the Government have issued G.O.Ms.No.479 dated 17.07.2004 according permission to Respondent to re-designate all the volunteers cadre who are absorbed in terms of G.O.Ms.No.391 dated 06.05.1991 as Attenders w.e.f. 06.05.1991 duly extending all other consequential benefits, but fixation of their seniority in the cadre of Attenders shall be subject to the disposal of W.P.No.17403/2003 filed by TTD Class IV employees Union of TTDs. Inspite of the same, the respondent has not re-desginated the petitioners in attender cadre and further provided promotion opportunity. As the similarly situated employees like that of petitioners have been re-designated and got promoted to Assistant/Shroff cadre vide orders dated 11.09.1992, the petitioners have also made a representation to the respondent temple and requested to consider their case also on the grounds of parity. As the authorities have not responded to the same, the petitioners herein filed W.P.No.10230 of 2005 before this Court and this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the respondent to take appropriate decision in accordance with the rules and regulation, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. Pursuant to the said order, the respondent (TTD) has issued impugned proceedings vide Roc.No.E5/12836/2005 dated 17.08.2005 and rejected the petitioners case. 8. A perusal of the impugned proceedings would indicate that the authority concerned has observed that the similarly situated employees were engaged on NMR basis between 1974 & 1978 and they are absorbed as per G.O.Ms.No.1458 dated 19.09.1981 and they joined in the post of Packer(Attender Cadre) in the year 1984. As they were absorbed in the Attender Cadre their seniority has been maintained in the cadre of Attender only as per the Seniority Register and therefore they were considered for promotion as Assistant/Shroff and accordingly they were promoted. Those persons were entrusted with the work of packing but they were not designated as Packers and they were only NMR’s. Further, there is no such post of packer in the previous TTD Service Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.1350 dated 02.08.1978. Hence, the petitioners’ case would not fall on par with those employees who are promoted and they are not entitled for promotion. 9. As rightly contended by the respondent-temple, the petitioners were absorbed as packers but not NMR’s and as there is no such post as packers in the previous TTD Service Rules, the petitioners were not entitled for promotion as they sought. Moreover, the petitioners have not referred to any rule or provision, in specific, in support of their claim and they are solely relying on the case of the employees who are NMRs, unlike the petitioners. In view of the same, the authority concerned has rightly issued the impugned proceedings rejecting the petitioners’ case and this court finds that there is no illegality or procedural irregularity in passing the said impugned proceedings dated 17.08.2005. 10. Further, this Court is not inclined to consider the request of the petitioners to make a fresh representation to the TTD at this length of time, as the same, might affect the rights of the other employees as well and, would lead to further litigation. Therefore, the petitioners have not made any case warranting the interference of this Court and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS