THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION No.45837 of 2016

ORDER:

Seeking to set aside the proceedings in Rc.No.495/2010/

P&E/A1-2, dated 29.07.2016 issued by respondent No.3 and its consequential proceedings in Cr.No.10673/2009/CPE/A2, dated 04.11.2016 passed by respondent No.2 and consequently to direct the respondents to revise the Seniority List of the Inspectors of Prohibition & Excise in Zone V and the Integrated Seniority List for Multi Zone-III duly placing name of the petitioner above the name of respondent No.4, the present Writ Petition is filed.

2) Heard Sri Sivaraju Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for respondents 1 to 3, and Sri Pratap Narayan Sanghi, learned senior counsel, representing Sri P.Narasimha, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4.

3) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that initially the petitioner and respondent No.4 were appointed as Prohibition and Excise Inspector under direct recruitment through APPSC and their commencement of probation was fixed at 02.11.1996 and in respect of respondent No.4 the same was re- fixed as 27.07.1999 as he could not pass the departmental tests as required under Telangana State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996. A final seniority list of Prohibition & Excise Inspectors of Zone V was published by orders of respondent No.3 dated 05.10.2007 wherein the name of the petitioner was shown at Sl.No.100 and name of respondent No.4 at Sl.No.143 and in the remarks column against name of respondent No.4, it was specifically mentioned that his date of commencement of probation was fixed from 27.07.1999 due to his not passing of departmental tests within the stipulated time. Further, in the final Integrated Seniority List of Multi Zone-III consisting of Zones V and VI prepared by respondent No.2 vide proceedings dated 29.09.2009, the name of respondent No.4 was shown at Sl.No.237 and the name of the petitioner was shown at Sl.No.71. However, in the said seniority list dated 29.09.2009, the name of the one K.Vara Prasad was shown at Sl.No.236 i.e. above the name of respondent No.4 shown at Sl.No.237. Therefore, questioning the same, respondent No.4 filed O.A. No.11245 of 2009 wherein vide order dated 07.07.2010, the Tribunal had allowed the said O.A. duly setting aside the Integrated Seniority List dated 29.09.2009 and directed the official respondents to prepare the revised seniority list as per the merit assigned by APPSC. Alleging non-implementation of the said order dated 07.07.2010, C.A. No.992 of 2011 was filed and the same was closed based on the compliance reported by the official respondents therein. However, respondent No.4 herein has filed CMA No.130 of 2014 in CA No.992 of 2011 alleging that the compliance reported was not a fact. Finally, in order to get over the appearance ordered in CMA No.130 of 2014, the official respondents have issued proceedings in Rc.No.495/2010/P&E/A1, dated 25.06.2016 proposing to revise the seniority of respondent No.4 at Sl.No.99A i.e. above the name of the petitioner herein solely on the ground that he secured more marks than the petitioner herein at the time of his initial appointment, to which, immediately the petitioner raised objections stating that as the respondent No.4 has not passed the required departmental tests, within the stipulated time, he cannot be placed above the name of the petitioner in the seniority list. However, brushing aside the said objections, the official respondents passed the order dated 29.07.2016 stating that on account of the order dated 07.07.2010 passed by the Tribunal, the seniority list has to be prepared in accordance with merit ranking alone and not based on roster point and the same is illegal and arbitrary. Though, the petitioner has instituted O.A. No.3620 of 2016 assailing the order dated 29.07.2016, the same was disposed by the Tribunal vide order dated 12.09.2016 directing the petitioner to avail the al