The Writ Petition was dismissed as not maintainable due to being filed after the limitation period. On merits, the court found that the promotion of Sri G.K. Venkoba was granted under the reservation category of Schedule Tribe and no other junior to the petitioner was promoted to the post of Deputy Collector during the petitioner's continuance in service. The promotion was granted only after the petitioner's retirement. Consequently, the petitioner's claim based on the promotion of the juniors after the petitioner's retirement has also been rightly rejected by the Tribunal.

JUDGMENT :

RAVI NATH TILHARI, J.

1) Heard Sri K.G. Krishna Murthy, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri A. Upendra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.V.S.Kishore Kumar, learned Government Pleader for Services-I for the respondents.

2) This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, challenging the Order, dated 08.12.2017, passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, (APAT) in Original Application No.2676 of 2017 (“O.A.”). He has also challenged the endorsement in CCLA’s Lr.No.DD2/271/2013 dated 06.09.2014 of the 2nd respondent.

3) The petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant on 06.1.1975 in Nalgonda District in the Revenue Department. He was transferred to the office of the 2nd respondent-the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, Andhra Pradesh State, Krishna District in the year 1981 and was promoted as Senior Assistant in the year 1986. He was allotted to Chittoor District as Deputy Tahsildar in the year 1990-91 and was relieved from the office of the 2nd respondent on 01.09.1997. He was promoted as Tahsildar in February, 2004 and was given the notional seniority in the cadre of Tashildar from 01.09.1995 vide proceedings CCLA’s Ref.No.X1/954/2010, dated 11.11.2010. He retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2008 and was sanctioned all the benefits of pension etc.

4) The petitioner after acquiring knowledge that some juniors including one Sri G.K. Venkoba, Tahsildar as per the seniority list of the Tahsildars issued vide proceedings CCLA’s Ref.No.X1/954/2010, dated 11.11.2010, in which G.K.Venkoba was placed at Sl.No.180, was drawing more pay than the petitioner, he represented the Government to fix his pay on par with Sri G.K. Venkoba which application was referred to the Chief Commissioner of the Land Administration vide Government Memo No.8233/Ser.I(1)/ 2013-3, dated 15.03.2013 but the same was rejected by the 2nd respondent vide the impugned endorsement dated 06.09.2014.

5) As per the endorsement dated 06.09.2014 Sri G.K. Venkoba was initially included in the panel year 2006-07, Deputy Collector Panel against Schedule Tribe (ST) roaster point. Subsequently, pursuant to the order of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, dated 28.11.2003 in W.P.No.17430 of 2002, the panel of Deputy Collectors which was approved earlier before revision of seniority, was revised by conducting review D.P.C based on the revision of seniority in the Tahsildars cadre from the panel year 1998-99 to 2006-07 and also for the panel year 2010-2011. The revised Deputy Collectors Panels was sent to the Government for approval. The Government after examining the revised panels of the Deputy Collectors approved and communicated the same vide G.O.Ms.No.502 Rev (Ser-I) Dept dated 16.09.2013. As per the revised Deputy Collectors Panel Sri G.K. Venkoba (S.T) was pushed down from the earlier panel 2006-07 to the Deputy Collector panel for the year 2010-11 at S.No.99. The petitioner retired from service on 31.03.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation. Sri G.K. Venkoba belongs to Scheduled Tribe community and his name was included in the panel year 2010-11 of Deputy Collector since he was in service as on the date of DPC, whereas the petitioner belonged to the general category and had also retired. Consequently the petitioner’s case for notional promotion as Deputy Collector and fixation of pay in the cadre of Deputy Collector at par with G.K. Venkoba deserved no consideration on merits.

6) The petitioner submitted representation vide letter No.DD2/271/2013 dated 17.11.2014 to the Government which was again sent to the 2nd respondent vide Government Memo No.33180/Ser.J(2)/2014 dated 01.12.2014 upon which the 2nd respondent vide letter dated 17.07.2015 informed the Government that the report of the Collector, Chittoor was called which was awaited. The petitioner’s representation dated 17.11.2014 to the government remained pending without disposal.

7) The pet