HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 31416 OF 2018

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction to the

2^nd respondent to accord promotion to petitioners to the post of School Assistant from SGT from the date of promotions granted by the 5th respondent to petitioners i.e. 1999 to 2002 respectively instead of 01.07.2004 with all consequential benefits like seniority, increments and payment of arrears, etcetera.

2. The case of petitioners is that they are all working as School Assistants (Maths and Science Subjects) in the 5^th respondent School on promotion from their initial post of Secondary Grade Teachers with requisite qualifications between 1999-2002 as per their seniority and subject requirement in a clear, sanctioned, aided vacancies arisen out of retirement. As it is an aided school, the 5^th respondent management submitted proposals to the 4^th respondent through Deputy Educational Officer for approval. Later the 4th respondent forwarded the same to the 3^rd respondent - Regional Joint Director. Petitioners state that the 3^rd respondent approved promotions of petitioners with effect from 01.07.2004 vide Proceedings dated 03.07.2004 but not from the date of actual promotions granted by the 5th respondent Correspondent.

2.1. Petitioners state that since then, they have been requesting Respondents 2 to 4 to accord approval to their promotions from the date of promotions given by the 5^th respondent. Since there is no response, they filed Writ Petition No. 2390 of 2010, wherein this Court directed the 1st respondent - Commissioner and Director of School Education to pass appropriate orders on the representation of petitioners on 27.09.2010. Though there were specific directions, the 2^nd respondent did not pass any orders. On the other hand, the 3rd respondent passed order dated 31.12.2014 rejecting the claim of petitioners to accord approval from the retrospective dates by stating as not feasible. It is pertinent to mention that this Court specifically directed the 1^st respondent to examine the issue with reference to the relevant provisions of law and orders issued by the Government from time to time, hence, the said action of the 3rd respondent is impugned in the present Writ Petition.

2.2. It is stated, the 3rd respondent is not the competent authority to pass orders, hence, petitioners filed Appeal through the 5^th respondent before the 2^nd respondent bringing the facts to their notice on 25.01.2018. Prior to this also, it is claimed, petitioners filed a representation to the 4^th respondent which was received on 03.01.2015. Though number of representations were filed before all the respondents, no action has been taken so far and the same are still pending. Very recently on 25.01.2018, they submitted Appeals to the 2^nd respondent separately also by enclosing promotional orders of the 5^th respondent and the Deputy Educational Officer's proposals to the DEO. In the present Appeals, petitioners clearly mentioned that G.O.Ms.No.49 dated 26.02.1998 on rationalization is not at all applicable to their cases and the then Deputy Educational Officer had reviewed all the particulars and aspects and then only recommended the dates of their promotions retrospectively. They have clearly stated that they were appointed long back and were promoted in a clear aided vacancy arisen out of retirement. 2.3. It is further stated, the 5th respondent had also considered all the aspects and effected their promotions as per their subject requirements and rightly submitted proposals to the competent authorities. The 4th petitioner is retiring on 30.09.2018 and others are retiring in 1 or 2 years. In fact, they lost their promotional chances to the next post of Head Master. As stated above, all the petitioners were promoted against clear vacancies and their vacancies are sanctioned aided posts and by granting promotions to them retrospectively there will not be any financial burden to the official respondents. Hence, this