THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION Nos.14469 of 1999 and 13313 of 2000 COMMON ORDER: In W.P.No.14469 of 1999 the petitioner seeks a direction to set aside the seniority list dated 10.06.1999 issued by the third respondent. A consequential direction is also sought to direct the respondents to proceed with the earlier linemen’s seniority list, vide memo dated 30.11.1998, and promote him to the post of Line Inspector. In W.P.No.13313 of 2000, he questions the promotion of the fourth respondent to the post of Line Inspector without considering his case for promotion on the basis of seniority. The petitioner herein was initially engaged as a helper on casual basis, and his services were absorbed with effect from 01.04.1981, at the Kothagudem Thermal Power Station whereat he worked till 1983. Since certain staff were found to be surplus, the petitioner and others were transferred to other circles. The petitioner was posted at Suryapet Division where he joined as a helper on 09.08.1983. The petitioner and others filed W.P.No.16362 of 1990 and batch before this Court seeking a direction for fixation of seniority from the date of their initial appointment. This Court, by order dated 31.07.1996, disposed of the said batch of Writ Petitions directing the respondents to absorb the petitioner and others in the circles in which they were working, and to prepare a fresh seniority list for each circle in which they were working. The petitioner’s seniority was determined at Suryapet, and he was promoted as an Assistant Lineman on 01.02.1995. The third respondent prepared a provisional seniority list, vide memo dated 30.11.1998, wherein the petitioner’s name was shown at Sl.No.21. Subsequently, objections were invited, and a final seniority list was prepared and communicated, vide proceedings dated 10.06.1999, wherein the petitioner was shown at Sl.No.60. The petitioner is aggrieved both by his being pushed down in the seniority list from Sl.No.21 to Sl.No.60, and in not being promoted as an Assistant Lineman before Sri Y.Suraiah (fourth respondent in W.P.No.13313 of 2000) was promoted as an Assistant Lineman on 24.10.1985. It is the petitioner’s case that he possessed the qualification of 8th Class pass and, since the rules stipulate qualification in LCE or a pass in the 4th form, he possessed the requisite qualification for being promoted as an Assistant Lineman even prior to when Sri Y.Suraiah (fourth respondent in W.P.No.13313 of 2000) was promoted; and, as the petitioner passed S.S.C. in the year 1990, atleast from that date he ought to have been promoted as an Assistant Lineman whereas he was actually promoted only in the year 1995. Sri P.Laxma Reddy, Learned Standing Counsel for AP Transco, would submit that, in as much as the provisional seniority list was communicated to the petitioner and his objections were called for, he is not entitled to question the validity of the seniority list on the ground of non-issuance of individual notice to him; this Court cannot be called upon to examine the validity of the seniority list in the absence of those, who are likely to be affected, being arrayed as respondents; the qualification prescribed prior to 1990 for being appointed as an Assistant Lineman was pass in the 4th form i.e. pass in the 9th Class, whereas the petitioner had admittedly passed 8th Class only; it is not even the petitioner’s case that a vacancy arose in 1990 conferring on him any right to have his case considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Lineman; and the challenge both to his seniority, and his not being promoted, must fail. Admittedly, a provisional seniority list was prepared and communicated to employees including the petitioner. They were called upon to submit their objections thereto. It is not even the petitioner’s case that he had submitted any objections to the provisional seniority list. No rule which requires each individual employee to be put on notice before his seniority is changed has been brought to the notice of this Court. While the petitioner’s grievance is with regards his being pushed down in the seniority list from Sl.No.21 to Sl.No.60, he has not chosen to array the persons placed between Sl.Nos.21 to Sl.No.60 as party respondents in this writ proceedings, and in their absence any examination to the seniority list would be wholly inappropriate. With regards promotion to the post of Assistant Lineman, the rules prescribe pass in the 4th form, which is pass in the 9th Class. It is the petitioner’s case that he passed 8th Class before 1990 and as such he was eligible to be promoted as Assistant Lineman prior to 1990. In the absence of any specific averment with regards any vacancy having arisen in the post of Assistant Lineman at any time after 1990, (when the petitioner had secured the qualification of S.S.C. and I.T.I.), till 1995 when he was actually promoted, it would be wholly inappropriate for this Court to direct his promotion as Assistant Lineman from 1990 onwards. Ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is permitted to submit a representation regarding the validity of the seniority list, and his entitlement to be promoted as an Assistant Lineman from 1990 onwards, to the competent authority, who shall consider the said representation in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation. Both the Writ Petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. However, in the circumstances, without costs. RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J Date:10.03.2011 usd