The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“….to recast the impugned seniority list issued in the category of DCTOs vide proceedings of the 2nd Respondent Rc.No.DXZ(1)/49/2023-Zone-II dated 04-08-2023 and proceedings of the 3rd Respondent Show Cause Notice Rc.No.A2/295/2021 dated- 29-10-2021 and proceedings in Rc.No.A2/295/2021 (order) dated 25-01-2022 and consequent directions of the 2nd Respondent vide CCSTs Ref.No.DXZ(2)/381/2021 dated 26-07-2023 as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice the same are without notice, application of mind and in ignorance of Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes Subordinate Service Rules, issued vide G.O.Ms.No.81 Revenue (CT.I) Department dated- 03-02-1990. The post of ACTO would be filed as per the Note to Rule 3 apart from violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and further direct the Respondent to revise the placement of the petitioner at appropriate place by taking into account -roaster point prescribed in Note to of Special Rule 3 i.e. in the cycle Of ACTO 10th Roaster Point in cycle of every 10 vacancies as per Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes Subordinate Service Rules, issued vide G.O.Ms.No.81 Revenue (CT.I) Department dated- 03-02-1990, the post of ACTO would be filed as per the Note to Rule 3….”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (ACTO) as per Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes Subordinate Service Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.81, dated 03.02.1990 (for short, ‘the Special Rules’). Rrule 3(c) of the Special Rules prescribes the cycle for appointment to the post of Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, which reads as follows:

“The appointment by direct recruitment and by transfer shall be in the following order:-

First Vacancy - Direct Recruitment

Second Vacancy - By Transfer

Third Vacancy - By Transfer

Fourth Vacancy - Direct Recruitment

Fifth Vacancy - By Transfer

Sixth Vacancy - Direct Recruitment

Seventh Vacancy - By Transfer

Eighth Vacancy - By Transfer

Ninth Vacancy - By Transfer

Tenth Vacancy - By Transfer”

4. The petitioner was appointed by transfer in 10th cycle point and joined in 2001 as ACTO. Based on the seniority, the respondents have prepared the final seniority list of ACTOs on 16.06.2008 and he got promotion to the post of DCTO on 12.08.2010. Now, he is eligible for promotion to the post of CTO. While the things stood thus, surprisingly, the respondents have revised the seniority list of ACTOs stating that the said seniority list has been revised based on the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in M.Surender Reddy v. Government of Andhra Pradesh in Civil Appeal No.5099 of 2006 and issued notices calling for objections on 29.10.2021. The petitioner has submitted his objections stating that while preparing the revised seniority list as per the above judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, the respondents have failed to consider his case as the same has to be prepared based on Rule 3 of the Special Rules issued on 03.02.1990. As the petitioner was appointed in 10th cycle point, the seniority has to be prepared based on rota-quota rule. Accordingly, as per the cycle direct recruitees vs. promotes, his seniority also be taken in the same ratio. But contrary to the above, the respondents, without furnishing any information, have prepared the present seniority list. Hence, the present writ petition.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contended that the said preparation of seniority list after lapse of 18 years is contrary to the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court. Learned counsel further submitted that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court, once the seniority is settled, the reasonable period prescribed is only three years. If any lapses or irregularities are pointed out or the seniority list is not prepared in accorda