ORDER :

Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the Learned Government Pleader for Services I and III.

PRAYER SOUGHT FOR BY THE PETITIONER:

2. This Writ Petition is filed to issue a writ of Mandamus by calling for records relating to the proceedings of the 2nd Respondent bearing No. 3161/A1/2016, dated 08.05.2017 and quash the same by declaring the same as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14 & 16 of Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion as Junior Assistant and promote him as such with effect from the date of the promotion of the 6th respondent, who is far junior to the petitioner, by conferring all consequential benefits, such as seniority, etc.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows: -

(a) Petitioner belongs to S.T. community, whereas the 6th Respondent belongs to B.C. Community. The Petitioner has been appointed as Watchman on 30.07.1999 in the SC & ST backlog vacancies and that the petitioner’s services were regularized from the said date and is declared to have completed his probation satisfactorily.

(b) With effect from 01.06.2002, the Petitioner has been converted as Office Subordinate (Attender) and the 6th Respondent herein was appointed as Office subordinate on compassionate grounds on 21.07.2010 by the 3rd Respondent herein and services of the 6th Respondent were regularized on 27.01.2010.

(c) The Petitioner has been temporarily promoted as Fieldman by the 4th Respondent on 01.12.2014 and in the promotion order, it has been mentioned that the promotion is purely on temporary basis and will not confer any right whatsoever and the petitioner is having his lien in the post of Office Subordinate.

(d) After the petitioner had worked for about 1½ years as fieldman, the petitioner had been reverted as Office Subordinate since, one Sri. Sk. Lateef, Assistant Inspector of Fisheries, Signoor, requested for reversion as Fieldman due to multiple ailments.

(e) The 6th Respondent who is far junior to the petitioner in the category of Office Subordinate is working as Junior Assistant having been promoted by the 4th Respondent on 16.11.2015 vide Procdg.No.956/A/2015 and the Petitioner is entitled to the same, since the seniority is basis for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant as per Rule 5(b) of A.P. State Subordinate Service Rules.

(f) The said rule provides that Non-Gazetted post should be related as selection post and such posts have to be filled up based on seniority, the post of Junior Assistant is a Non-Gazetted post, in as much as the petitioner is fully eligible and qualified for promotion as Junior Assistant and in fact, belongs to S.T. community, to whom rule of reservation is made applicable in promotions also.

(g) Therefore, the petitioner made representation on 14.07.2016 to the Deputy Director of Fisheries, Nalgonda, which had been received and acknowledged, for promoting him as Junior Assistant, since the 6th respondent, who is working as Office Subordinate, who is far junior to him had been promoted on 16.11.2015. The 5th respondent herein had sought clarification from the 2nd respondent vide letter Number 162/A/2016, dated 28.02.2017 mentioning the true facts that the petitioner is senior to the 6th respondent.

(h) After the re-organisation of districts, no allotments of employees had taken place and the seniority of the employees of erstwhile districts are being taken into account for the purpose of affecting promotions. The Petitioner is nearly about 11 years senior to the 6th respondent in the category of Office Subordinate (Attender) and is entitled to be promoted as Junior Assistant on par with the 6th respondent with all consequential benefits.

(i) The petitioner submitted all the requisite qualification certificates to the 4th respondent vide his representation dated 09.08.2016 that he had passed intermediate and departmental tests.

(j) The Petitioner instead of being promoted as