HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 12112 OF 2009 Dated: 10-09-2009 Between: Dr. S. Bhavani ... PETITIONER AND The Govt. of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Ex-Officio Secretary to the Government, Health, Medical & Family Welfare (R1) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and four others ... RESPONDENTS HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 12112 OF 2009 ORDER: (Per Sri C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J) This writ petition has been filed against order dated 09-06-2009 in O.A No. 10502 of 2008 on the file of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short, ‘the Tribunal’), whereby the said O.A filed by the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner and respondent No.4 were appointed as Senior Lecturers Naturopathy in the Nature Cure Hospital, Begumpet having been selected through common proceedings issued by respondent No.1. Through G.O.Rt.No.1831, Health Medical and Family Welfare (R1) Department, dated 15-12-2008, respondent No.4 was appointed as full additional charge of the post of Superintendent/Chief Medical Officer, Nature Cure Hospital, Hyderabad. The said order was questioned in the aforementioned O.A filed by the petitioner mainly on the ground that she being at serial No.1 of the selection list prepared by the Selection Committee, appointment of respondent No.4 as Superintendent/Chief Medical Officer in full additional charge is arbitrary and illegal. The O.A was contested on merits by the respondents. The Tribunal after a detailed consideration of the rival submissions of the parties felt that as respondent No.4 was shown at serial No.1 in the merit list prepared by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission and applying Rule 36(i) of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Rules, 1996 (for short, ‘the Rules’), he was entitled to be treated as senior to the petitioner and, that therefore, there was no illegality in appointing respondent No.4 as Chief Medical Officer in full additional charge. At the hearing, Sri Jalakam Sampath Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner was placed at serial No.1 by the Selection Committee while respondent No.4 was at serial No.3, the petitioner should be treated as senior even for being appointed as Chief Medical Officer in full additional charge. Dr. P.B. Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel representing respondent No.4 submitted that Rule 36(i) of the Rules is categorical and the same is to the effect that in respect of the candidates selected by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission or any other selecting authority by direct recruitment, the seniority shall be with reference to their ranking assigned irrespective of their date of probation in that category. Though the Tribunal held in favour of respondent No.4 while accepting the above mentioned contention, we are of the view that it is not necessary for us to express a final opinion on this aspect because what has been questioned by the petitioner before the Tribunal and also before us is the decision of respondent No.1- Government in placing respondent No.4 as full additional charge of the post of the Chief Medical Officer pending filling up of the vacancy on regular basis. The learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 submitted that since all the candidates who are claiming the post of Chief Medical Officer are yet to complete probation, the post in question could not be filled up on permanent basis and that as their probation period is coming to an end by 31-12-2009, the respondents would commence the process of filling up the post on regular basis after finalising the inter se seniority with reference to the extant rules. Therefore, we are of the view that the incharge arrangement made, which is intended to be a stop gap arrangement till inter se seniority is finalised and the post of Chief Medical Officer is filled up on permanent basis consequent on finalising the seniority list, cannot be disturbed at this stage. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed leaving the question of inter se seniority open without reference to the finding given by the Tribunal in the impugned order. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 are directed to finalise the inter se seniority on or before 31-01-2010 after following the procedure under the Rules. Within one month of finalising the inter se seniority, the post of Superintendent/Chief Medical Officer shall be filled up on permanent basis after considering all the eligible candidates. Till such time as the post was filled up on permanent basis, respondent No.4 shall be allowed to continue as the Chief Medical Officer in full additional charge. We make it clear that respondent no.4’s continuance as Superintendent/Chief Medical officer would not confer any preferential right on him for regular appointment. In view of the disposal of the writ petition on merits, WPMP No. 21317 of 2009 and WVMP Nos.2487 and 2557 of 2009 are disposed of as infructuous. ANIL R. DAVE, CJ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 10th September, 2009 ks