P. LAKSHMANA REDDY, J, J.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition is filed seeking a writ of certiorari by calling records relating to and connected file OA 4626 of 2000 on the file of the A. P. Administrative Tribunal, hyderabad and to set aside the orders dated 10. 8. 2000 by holding the same arbitrary, erroneous and unsustainable and also to declare the writ petitioners as seniors to the unofficial respondent No. 3 in the cadre of Senior Assistants and also to direct the official respondents 1 and 2 to consider the case of the writ petitioners to the posts of Superintendents in the existing vacancies.

( 2 ) THE relevant facts in brief are as follows: the 3rd respondent was recruited as junior Assistant in the Education Department on 2. 9. 1980 at Kakinada. The first petitioner was appointed as junior Assistant on 17. 8. 1982, the second petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant on 12. 8. 1983 and the third petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant on 5. 9. 1984 in the same department. All of them were regularized as Junior Assistants taking their dates of appointments into consideration. Thus, the third respondent was senior to the petitioners 1 to 3 in the cadre of senior Assistants. While so, on 12. 9. 1988 the Government issued G. O. Ms. No. 361 sanctioning Senior Assistant posts for the department in which the petitioners 1 to 3 and 3rd respondent are working. In order to get promotion as Senior Assistant one must pass the prescribed departmental tests. The petitioners 1 to 3 had passed all the departmental tests even prior to the year 1988. The third respondent passed three departmental tests prior to 1982 and appeared for remaining Part-I Deputy Inspectors test in the year 1987. But, the results were published in A. P. Gazette declaring the results of the said test on 6. 10. 1988 and as per the said results the 3rd respondent passed that departmental test also. But, the said gazette was not printed and communicated to the department till December, 1988. As the posts were sanctioned on 12. 9. 1988, the department prepared combined seniority list on 11. 10. 1988 of Junior Assistants and typists eligible for promotion as Senior assistants. Though by then the 3rd respondent passed all the departmental tests, on account of non-printing of results in the Official Gazette and non-communication of the gazette to the department till december, 1988, the entry could not be made in the Service Register of the 3rd respondent. As there was no entry regarding the passing of departmental test in the service Register by 11. 10. 1988, the department did not include the name of the 3rd respondent in that seniority list of Junior Assistants prepared for the purpose of promotion to the cadre of Senior assistants. The petitioners 1 to 3 were appointed as Senior Assistants on 18. 10. 1988 ignoring the 3rd respondent who is senior to them. The 3rd respondent made representation to the District Educational officer to consider her for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant on par with her juniors since the promotions were effected given to the juniors. As there was no positive response, the third respondent approached the A. P. Administrative Tribunal in R. P. No. 997 of 1998 on the file of the Tribunal and the Tribunal directed the district Educational Officer to reconsider her case basing on the results published in the Gazette on 6. 10. 1988. But, in spite of the orders passed by the Tribunal the district Educational Officer rejected the request of the third respondent. According to the third respondent, the Director of school Education also directed the District educational Officer, Kakinada to consider third respondent s case for promotion of senior Assistant. Thereafter, on 27. 4. 1990, the third respondent was promoted as senior Assistant saying that her seniority will be decided after receipt of the orders of the Director. Even prior to that the third respondent had approached the Tribunal again by filing R. P. No. 15167 of 1987 and the said

Click Here to Read the rest of this document