IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY , THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 1000 of 1999 Between: ..... PETITIONER AND .....RESPONDENT 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 Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.Y.VENKAT SASTRY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE Mr JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD W.P. NO.1000 of 1999 ORDER : ( Per HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED ) This Writ Petition has been ﬁled challenging the order dated 31-8-1998 in O.A.No.6342 of 1996 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and consequently seeks a direction to the respondents to revise and reﬁx the pension and other retiremental beneﬁts by awarding the Selection Grade on par with his junior Sri Roshan Ali. The petitioner was initially appointed as driver on 11-8-1967 in the Probation Wing of Department of Prisons, and his services were regularized from that date. It is the case of the petitioner that he was overlooked for promotion to the post of Selection Grade and his immediate junior Sri Roshan Ali was promoted to the post of Selection grade by order dated 13-5-1983. According to the respondents, the Prisons Wing and Probation Wing are two separate units in the Department of Prisons, and that proposal for sanction of Selection Grade posts of drivers were submitted to the Government separately in respect of Prisons Wing and Probation Wing. So far as the Prisons Wing is concerned, one Selection Grade post of driver was sanctioned by the Government and therefore Sri Roshan Ali’s name was considered and he was promoted to the Selection Grade Post. The petitioner could not be appointed to the Selection Grade Post because the Government did not accord sanction for a selection grade post in the Probation Wing, where the petitioner is working. It is also seen from the records that a proposal was sent by the department for sanction of selection grade post in the Probation Wing where the petitioner was working, the Government in its discretion did not sanction the post. Since the 2nd respondent on humanitarian grounds only recommended the case of the petitioner for stepping up the pay of the petitioner on par with Sri Roshan Ali, who was promoted to the selection grade post, and the Government in its discretion rejected the claim of the petitioner. The Tribunal considering the entire aspects of the matter, declined to entertain the O.A. In the circumstances, we do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order. The Writ Petition fails and is dismissed. No costs. ______________ GM, J ______________ GBP, J 10-9-2008 KK THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO :1000 of 1999 10-9-2008