IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.30060 of 2025 DATED: 27.01.2026 Between:

U.Krishnaiah …Petitioner AND

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department and others …Respondents

ORDER:

1. Heard Sri Ch.Jannatha Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I and Sri N.Ramu, learned Counsel for the unofficial respondent No.4.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was promoted as School Assistant (Social) from SGT on 26.08.2025 and he joined duty in the promotional post on the same day at Mandal Parishad High School, Urakonda. While it being so, the respondent No.3 issued the impugned proceedings No.A9/3304/2025 dated 23.09.2025, based on the representation given by the respondent No.4 dated 26.08.2025, mentioning it as a ‘Notice’. In the operative portion of the said notice, it is mentioned that the petitioner may be reverted from the post of School Assistant (Social) to SGT, without calling for any explanation from the petitioner. In view of the same, the instant writ petition is filed.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader, basing on the counter filed by respondent No.3, submits that after noticing the mistake crept in the records, the respondent No.3, after re-examining the matter and in order to rectify the mistake and to maintain the seniority of the candidates as per the Rules and instructions, issued a show-cause notice in Rc.No.A9/3304/2025 dated 23.09.2025 to the petitioner. The petitioner, instead of submitting a reply to the show-cause notice, filed the writ petition and there are no merits and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

4. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondent No.4, basing on the counter, submits that the respondent No.4 is senior to the petitioner, as the respondent No.4 completed B.Ed. in the month of June, 2004, whereas the writ petitioner completed his B.Ed. in the month of April, 2005. As the respondent No.4 acquired the required qualifications for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Social) prior to the writ petitioner and the respondent No.3 has rightly issued the show-cause notice to the petitioner for reverting him from the promotional post to accommodate the respondent No.4. The petitioner, without submitting his explanation, approached this Court and there are no merits and requested to dismiss the writ petition.

5. After hearing both sides and upon perusing the record, this Court is of the considered view that the respondent No.3 prepared the final seniority list on 23.08.2025 in the ratio of 1:1 for promotion to the post of School Assistant (Social). Within three days thereafter, the respondent No.3 issued proceedings on 26.08.2025 promoting the petitioner as School Assistant (Social), without giving opportunity to other qualified teachers. After the promotion of the petitioner, the respondent No.4 made an objection petition by way of representation to the respondent No.3 with regard to the promotion in favour of the petitioner. Basing on the said representation, the respondent No.3 issued the impugned proceedings Rc.No.A9/3304/2025 dated 23.09.2025 stating that the petitioner may be reverted from the post of School Assistant (Social) to SGT. Though the impugned proceedings are mentioned as a ‘Notice’, nowhere it is mentioned that the petitioner was called upon to submit his explanation.

However, in the operative portion of the impugned proceedings, it is stated that the petitioner may be reverted from the post of School Assistant to SGT.

6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has rightly contended that the respondent authorities, without following due procedure, issued the impugned proceedings without calling for any explanation from the petitioner and the action of respondent No.3 is illegal and contrary to the Rules.

7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader as well as learned Counsel