IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9467 of 2008 Between: B.Radha Krishnaiah S/o.Buddaiah O/o.Dist S.C.S Co-op Society Ltd Nellore Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Govt of A.P Rep.by its Principal Secretary Social Welfare Dept Secretariat Buildings Hyd 2 The Managing Director A.P.S.C.F.C Ltd Damodaram Sanjeevaiah Sankshema Bhavan Masab Tank Hyd 3 T.Srinivas Prasad S/o.T.V Narsaiah O/o. Dist Schedule Caste Service Co-Op Society Nellore Dist .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondent not to finalize the seniority of Asst. Engineer Dist wise or state wise and further in the Dy Engineer category Dist wise or state with regard to the seniority of the petitioner and respondent is concerned till the appeal is disposed by the 1st respondent as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court in WP No.3354/2007 dt.26-10-2007 and by protecting the status of the petitioner till final orders are passed in the appeal dt.15-2-2007 filed before the 1st respondent as per the Memo No.RC No.A2/3825/APSC/2006 dt 26-4-2007 and also as per the Lr.No.A2/756/APSC/2008 dt.5-3-2008 of the 2nd respondent and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.Y.V.SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent No.: M.GANGA RAO(SC FOR APSCCFS,HYD) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.9467 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner was initially appointed as Technical Work Inspector, vide proceedings dated 12-09-1985. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer, on 21-01-1997, and his services were regularized with effect from 05-02- 1997. The 3rd respondent was appointed as Tracer-cum-Blue Print Operator, and subsequently he too was promoted as Assistant Engineer, on the same day, on which the petitioner was promoted to that post. The regularization of the services of that post was also with effect from 05-02-1997. The petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.No.19664 of 1999, in the matter of fixation of inter se seniority. In pursuance of the directions issued therein, a seniority list is said to have been prepared on 19-10-2000, wherein the petitioner was shown as senior to the 3rd respondent. In the recent past, the 3rd respondent made a representation in relation to the seniority, in that very post. A provisional seniority list was prepared by respondents 1 and 2, and vide memo dated 26-04-2007, the petitioner was required to submit his objections to the provisional seniority list. The same is challenged in this writ petition. The petitioner contends that the seniority for the post of Assistant Engineer has already become final, and there is absolutely no basis for the respondents 1 and 2 in preparing another seniority list. Heard Sri Y.V. Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare, for respondent No.1, and Sri M.Ganga Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Though it is strongly pleaded by the petitioner that a seniority list was prepared by the 2nd respondent, vide proceedings dated 19-10-2000, a perusal of the said proceedings discloses that it is an order, through which the petitioner and certain other candidates were temporarily promoted to the posts of Deputy Executive Engineers. It was clearly mentioned that the temporary promotion is subject to the claims of seniors, and the judgments in various proceedings. Obviously, with a view to prepare a seniority list, in the category of Assistant Engineers, the 2nd respondent initiated steps and prepared a provisional seniority list. As required under law, the 2nd respondent called for objections from the petitioner and other similarly situated persons. The petitioner can be said to have suffered any grievance, if only the final seniority list defeats his rights, in any manner. It is too premature, either for the petitioner, or this Court, to evaluate the action of the 2nd respondent, in the matter of fixation of seniority. The writ petition is premature, and it is accordingly dismissed. It is, however, made clear that it shall be open to the petitioner to put forward all his contentions in reply to the impugned proceedings, and can approach this Court, if he feels aggrieved by the final seniority list. If the objections are not submitted by the petitioner, it shall be open to him to do so, within a period of two weeks from today. _______________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt. 28-04-2008. KO To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}