Suresh Kumar Kait, J.

1. This writ petition is filed for the following relief:

“For a wit of certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with the orders dated 12.10.2015 in O.A. No. 2669 of 2012 on the file of Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and to quash or set aside the same and to pass such other order or orders as this court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. The applicant before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, is 1st respondent herein. As per her claim, she belongs to S.T. category. Through Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, under limited recruitment, she was appointed as Junior Assistant on 16.6.2001, in the office of the 2nd respondent - Engineer-in-Chief (PR) Hyderabad. Her probation was declared on 15.4.2004.

3. By virtue of policy of the Government to provide reservations in promotions vide G.O.Ms.No.5 Social Welfare (ROR1) Department dated 14.02.2003 and G.O.Ms.No.2 social Welfare (SW.ROR1) Department dated 9.1.2004, in an 100 point roster, 8th point in the said roster, has been earmarked for S.T.(W).

4. Vacancy in the cadre of Senior Assistant in the office of the 2nd petitioner for S.T.(W), in 8th slot, arose during the panel year 2005-06. For promoting a candidate from the cadre of Junior Assistant to Senior Assistant, one has to put in three years of services, besides passing in departmental test i.e., Accounts Test for PWD Officers and Subordinates. Though the 1st respondent has put in three years of service by the time of arising of vacancy, has not passed the required departmental test. As no eligible candidate under S.T.(W) category was available to fill up the 8th slot by promotion, the vacancy could not be filled up for the panel year 2005-06 and it was carried forward to panel year of 2006-07. The 1st respondent appeared for Accounts Test for PWD Officers and Subordinates on 17.6.2007 and the results were published on 18.09.2007, in which she was declared to have passed the said test.

5. Accordingly, she made representation dated 5.11.2007, to the 2nd petitioner herein, for considering her case for promotion to the cadre of Senior Assistant with effect from 17.6.2007. Her request was not considered. However, she was later considered for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant in the leave vacancy on 10.02.2009 and subsequently owing to sanction of additional posts of Senior Assistants and also in view of promotion of one of the Senior Assistants as Superintendent on 1.1.2010, her case was considered and regularized in the cadre of Senior Assistant, with effect from 1.01.2010, on which date the vacancy arose.

6. The 1st respondent again made representations on 30.04.2011, 16.7.2011 and 8.9.2011 renewing her request to consider her case for promotion to the cadre of Senior Assistant from 17.6.2007. Aggrieved by the action of the Government in not considering her request, approached the Tribunal. By the impugned order dated 12.10.2015, the Tribunal allowed her claim and directed the Government to promote her as Senior Assistant with effect from 17.6.2007 against the roster point No.8 meant for ST(W) with all consequential benefits such as fixation of pay, arrears of salary and also to consider for promotion to the post of Superintendent against the said slot, within a period of five months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition came to be filed by the Government.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioners, while not disputing the facts with regard to arising of vacancy for the post of Senior Assistant in the category of S.T.(W) in 8th slot in 100 point roster, in the office of the 2nd petitioner during the panel year of 2005-06 and that it was carried forward up to panel year of 2006-07 for want of eligible candidate and that 1st respondent being the only women candidate in S.T. category, and she appearing for the Accounts Test for PWD Officers