HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No. 3069 OF 2018

O R D E R:

Petitioner seeks consideration of his case for promotion to the post of Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes for the panel year 2016-2017 as the DPC meet was not conducted and panel was not approved though sufficient vacancies were available.

2. The case of petitioner is that the 3^rd respondent vide Reference dated 30.08.2017 submitted proposals to the 1^st respondent in connection with Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) meet for selection and promotion to the post of Joint Commissioners, Commercial Taxes for the panel year 2016-2017 wherein his name figured at Serial No.1. The 1st respondent vide Memo dated 18.09.2017 informed the 3^rd respondent that panel year 2016-2017 was lapsed, hence, requested to furnish fresh proposals to the Government for taking further action. Thereafter, the 3^rd respondent vide Reference dated 12.10.2017 furnished the revised seniority list of Assistant Commissioners (CT) published in Gazette No.155 dated 01.04.2014, as per which, his name reflected at Sl.No.134 in the seniority list (Assistant Commissioners) and at serial No.1 in the proposals among 11 officers to be considered for promotion as Joint Commissioner on ad hoc basis.

It is stated, the above action of respondents is not in consonance with the Rules and Government Orders issued from time to time. As per Rule 6(b) of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 and G.O.Ms.No.337, GAD (Ser.B) Department, dated 18.06.1983, selection and promotion of Deputy Commissioners as Joint Commissioners did not take place in the panel year 2016-2017 without any valid reasons. It is stated, the proposals of the 3^rd respondent dated 30.08.2017 for consideration of eight Deputy Commissioners for promotion as Joint Commissioners of Commercial Taxes holds good and their names have to be considered for the panel year 2016-2017 as per Rule-6(b) and G.O.Ms.No.337, dated 18.06.1983. It is also stated, respondents should consider the proposals of the 3^rd respondent dated 12.10.2017 numbering eleven Deputy Commissioners for promotion as Joint Commissioners for the panel year 2017-2018 only after considering the proposals dated 30.08.2017 for the panel year 2016-2017. The action of respondents in overlooking the panel for the year 2016-2017 is not in accordance with Government orders when there were vacancies during that panel year.

It is stated, while working as Deputy Commissioner at Hyderabad (Rural Division), petitioner was implicated in a false case of possessing the properties disproportionate to known sources of income and ACB authorities have registered Crime No. 31 dated 12.08.2013; he submitted reply dated 30-09-2014 to the Notice issued by the Inspector of Police/I.O. ACB, HR, Hyderabad’s dated 02-08-2014 and 12-09-2014, stating that there are no disproportionate assets against him. Petitioner is stated to have submitted representations dated 24.08.2017 and 05.12.2017 to the 1st respondent to consider his case for promotion as per sub-rule (b) of Rule 6 which states that 01^st September of the year shall be reckoned as the qualifying date to determine the eligibility of candidate for promotion. G.O.Ms.No.66, GA (Ser.C) Dept., dated 30.01.1991 also clearly laid down that promotion should be deferred only when charges of misconduct are framed by the competent authority and served on the concerned delinquent officer or a charge sheet has been filed against him in criminal court, as the case may be. In the case of petitioner, neither charges of misconduct are framed and served by Departmental Disciplinary Authority nor any charge sheet is filed in the criminal court by the ACB authorities as on 01^st September of 2016, the date to be reckoned for consideration for promotion during the panel year 2016-2017.

It is stated that the 1^st respondent vide GO Rt.No.765, dated 18.12.2017 initiated disciplinary proceedings alleging non-submission of Annual Property Returns (APRs) un