HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 7150 OF 2025

O R D E R:

Petitioners approached this Court aggrieved by the action of the State Government in issuing Memo No. 73, dated 24.07.2021 and Memo No.1356 dated 24.07.2021 in particular Para 5 thereof, by which the Government contemplated a review of promotions granted after 02.06.2014. The purported basis for this exercise was the Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 11.12.2018 in Writ Petition No. 4415 of 2016; however, petitioners contend that the impugned action, instead of being a faithful implementation of that judgment, is in clear violation of constitutional provisions, the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and the settled principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of cases as well as by this Court.

1.1. Pursuant to the impugned memo, dated 24.07.2021, consequential proceedings were issued on 27.08.2021, whereby the objections submitted by petitioners 1 to 3 were rejected without due application of mind and without consideration of the specific contentions raised. These rejection orders, along with the consequential Government Orders and steps taken by the respondents to give effect to the revised panels, have confirmed the illegal procedure adopted and caused grave prejudice and severe injustice to petitioners, whose settled promotions and consequential seniority stand disturbed without lawful justification. They contend that the impugned action is illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

2. It is the case of petitioners that their promotions were effected under G.O.Ms.No.5 dated 14.02.2003 and G.O.Ms.No.26 dated 20.02.2009, which provided for reservation in promotion with consequential seniority to members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. They assert that after the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 4415 of 2016, the State constituted a Committee, collected cadre-wise data and affirmed before this Court in contempt proceedings that the exercise prescribed in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India¹ had been duly undertaken.

2.1. According to petitioners, once this exercise was completed and promotions were granted on that basis, the right to consequential seniority became a constitutional incident of

(2006) 8 SCC 212

promotion and could not be unsettled by an executive fiat. They urge that Para 5.2 of Memo No.1356 dated 24.07.2021, by providing that after adequacy is achieved seniority shall revert to the feeder cadre, effectively revives the "catch-up" principle which had been legislatively abrogated by the 85^th Constitutional Amendment. They also contend that their objections to the provisional list were rejected by order dated 27.08.2021 without reasons, which vitiates the decision-making process.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners Sri Jogram Tejavath draws attention of this Court to the constitutional background and case law. He contends that this Court in its order dated 11.12.2018 in Writ Petition No. 4415 of 2016 upheld G.O.Ms.No. 26, dated 20.02.2009 with regard to consequential seniority to the individual who got promoted under Rule of Reservation. In the said judgment, it was advised to review the promotions which were considered earlier in the State. According to learned counsel, the intention of this Court is to review the matter where consequential seniority is not considered, but the State Government had misinterpreted and revised the seniority status that if the adequate is raised in the particular cadre, the promotions’ should be considered based on the initial category seniority which is quash against the above said order. Promotions which were considered earlier degrades the SC/ST candidates against the constitutional amendment and verdict of the Supreme Court of India. Learned counsel accuses that the Law Department and Finance Department have not followed the said procedure and