HON’BLE MRS. JUSTI CE SUREPALLI NANDA WRI T PETI TI ON No.27729 OF 2023

ORDER:

Heard Sri S.Ramananda Swamy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Services-I I I appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The petitioners approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“…to issue writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not fixing the date of promotions to the petitioners to the post of Extension Officer Grade-I from 23/05/2018 on par with the same batch mates by considering representations, dated 26/07/2021 and 29/08/2023 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory and unconstitutional and contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court and consequently direct the respondents to fix the date of promotion of the petitioners to the post of Extension Officer Grade-I notionally from 23/05/2018, the date of promotion of first 88 candidates of the same batch vide Proc. No. 313/ E/2017, dated 23/05/2018 of the 3^rd respondent with all consequential benefits and pass…”

3. It is specific case of the petitioners that the respondents are not fixing the date of promotions to the petitioners to the post of Extension Officer Grade-I from 23/05/2018 on par with the same batch mates by considering representations, dated 26/07/2021 and 29/08/2023 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory and unconstitutional and contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the present Writ Petition is filed.

4. PERUSED THE RECORD:-

A. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners places reliance on the Division Bench judgment of this Court, dated 16.04.2018 passed in W.P.No.36811 of 2013 and the same is extracted hereunder:-

O.A.No.193 of 2012 was filed before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter, ‘the Tribunal’), by eleven Secondary Grade Teachers in Karimnagar District, who were appointed on 04.10.2002 under DSC2001, seeking a declaration that they were entitled to notional seniority from 18.01.2002 on par with the first batch of DSC-2001 candidates. They sought a consequential direction to the authorities to follow the DSC ranking among all the DSC-2001 candidates for the purpose of promotion to the post of School Assistants with all consequential benefits. By order dated 27.02.2013, the Tribunal allowed the O.A. holding that the applicants were entitled to notional seniority as per their ranking in the merit list of DSC-2001 on par with the teachers appointed on 18.01.2002. The authorities were directed to prepare the revised seniority list as per the ranking given to the various teachers in DSC-2001, communicate copies to the concerned teachers, receive their objections and then issue the final seniority list. They were further directed to promote the applicants to the posts of School Assistants as per their eligibility and merit by extending to them notional promotions with monetary benefit from the date of their appointments. Aggrieved by these directions, the erstwhile Government of Andhra Pradesh and its officials in the Education Department filed this writ petition.

Interim suspension of the operation of the order under challenge was granted by this Court on 19.12.2013.

Sri Ch.Jagannatha Rao, learned counsel for the respondents-applicants, would inform this Court that the matter is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in BALWANT SINGH NARWAL V/s. STATE OF HARYANA1 .

Perusal of the order under challenge reflects that the Tribunal also relied upon the said judgment.

It is not in dispute that the appointments of the respondents-applicants were delayed owing to a lapse on the part of the authorities. However, others covered by the same selection were appointed on 18.01.2002.

In BALWANT SINGH NARWAL1 , the Supreme Court opined that the candidates who were selected against earlier vacancies but could not be appointed along with oth