Promotion eligibility must be determined based on established Service Rules, irrespective of current posting.

ORDER :

Present writ petition is filed seeking following relief:

“…issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for all the connected records, including impugned proceedings of the first respondent in Rc.No.2126/96-E, dated 04.02.2004, and quash the same as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law, and further direct respondents 1 and 2 to promote the petitioner as Senior Assistant w.e.f. 04.02.2004 with all consequential benefits, including seniority, monetary etc., and to pass….”

2. Petitioner, being a Graduate in Bachelor of Arts, was appointed as Attender by proceedings, dated 04.12.1985, issued by the 1^st respondent. Later, he was promoted as driver in the year 1994 and subsequently, in view of his acquisition of technical qualification of passing of Typewriting examination, he came to be promoted as Typist, by proceedings, dated 31.07.1995, issued by the 1^st respondent. The service conditions of the employees working under 1^st respondent were stated to be governed by Service Rules viz., Service Regulations of the Employees of the District Scheduled Castes Service Co-operative Societies Limited (for short, the “Service Rules”). Following aforesaid Service Rules, petitioner stated to have been initially appointed as Attender and later promoted as Typist. He claims to be entitled for further promotion to hold the post of Senior Assistant as he has acquired the qualification of passing Accounts Test for Subordinate Officers Part.I and that he has completed the minimum tenure of five years as Typist. Despite the same, overlooking petitioner by impugned proceedings, dated 04.02.2004, the 4^th respondent has been promoted as Senior Assistant. Assailing the said proceedings issued by the 1^st respondent, present writ petition is filed.

3. Respondents 1 to 3 filed counter-affidavit inter alia stating that as petitioner has been working in Engineering Wing of Social Welfare Department, for all purposes, his appointment has to be considered to be not in the Department of 1^st respondent Society, therefore, is not entitled to be considered for promotion as Senior Assistant. Only such of those employees, who have been appointed under 1^st respondent Society, alone were entitled to be considered for promotion, besides that the Services Rules quoted above have no application or relevance to the service conditions of the petitioner, rather petitioner is governed by the service conditions formulated and applicable to Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Castes Co-operative Finance Corporation Limited. The promotion made in favour of 4^th respondent, therefore, has been justified by stating that the State and Subordinate Service Rules provided for consideration of promotion to the post of Senior Assistant, even if the candidate do not possess the qualification of passing Accounts Test for Subordinate Officers Part-I, which could be acquired at later point in time. In view of the same, the respondents have tried to justify the promotion given to 4^th respondent and that the writ petitioner was not entitled to be considered for promotion at all.

4. Heard Smt.Y.Mahalakshmi, learned counsel, representing Sri Ramamohan K., learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gandrala Rathna Kumar, learned standing counsel for 1^st respondent Society, appearing for respondents 1 to 3. Despite service of notice, none appears for 4^th respondent.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been initially appointed as Attender, later promoted as Driver and subsequently, promoted as Typist and all these appointment and promotions were effected by the 1^st respondent Society, therefore, inasmuch as the appointing authority being the 1^st respondent, merely because petitioner has been posted to disc