` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2723 of 2008 Between: 1 M. Venkanna, S/o. Mallaiah, R/O. Kurmarthy Village, Kattangoor mandal, Nalgonda District. 2 Ch. Krishnaiah, S/o. Viswanadham, R/o. Mandalapuram, Nakirekal Mandal, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Company Rep.b yits Divisional Engineer, Electrical, Operation, Nalgonda. 2 The Superintending Engineer, Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Company Limited, (Operation), Nalgonda. 3 The Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Company Rep. byits Chairman & Managing Director, Red Hilld, Hyderabad -04. .....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 to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ to setaside the impugned memo No. DEE/OP/NLG/ADM/U.1/d.no. 1960/07, dated 3-12- 2007 on the file of 1st respondent by declaring the same as illegal, void and without jurisdiction and violation of articles 14 and 16 of constituion of india and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.VENKAT RAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2723 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioners were appointed as Junior Linemen. The respondents issued a provisional seniority list, dated 10.09.2007, wherein they are said to have figured at Serial Nos.15 and 46 respectively. Subsequently, the respondents issued another provisional seniority list, dated 03.12.2007. In this, the 1st petitioner was shown at serial No.75 and the 2nd petitioner, at serial No.78. They raise an objection as to the validity of this exercise and seek to set aside the said provisional seniority list. The petitioners contend that the seniority list would assume significance, in the context of promotion to the Assistant Linemen, and that the respondents did not follow the correct parameters. The respondents filed a counter affidavit stating inter alia that since no objections were received in response to the provisional seniority list, dated 03.12.2007, it has been finalized. It is also stated that the relevant guidelines were followed, in the matter of preparation of the seniority list. Heard Sri M.Venkatram Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri P.R.Balarami Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. Normally the writ petitions would not be entertained against the provisional seniority lists. The reason is that an aggrieved person can always put forward his contention before the authority concerned; and the actual grievance can be said to have arisen, if only his contentions are not taken into account, while preparing the final seniority list. The petitioners do not appear to have responded or raised objections to the provisional seniority list, dated 03.12.2007. So is the case with the other employees. Therefore, the respondents have finalized the said provisional seniority list. If the petitioners have any grievance against the final seniority list, it shall always be open to them to challenge the same. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioners to challenge the final seniority list, if they feel aggrieved by it. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 02.07.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2723 of 2008 Date: 02.07.2008 JSU