IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 26454 of 1998 Between: Thummapudi Chandra Rao, S/o. Subbaiah, A.P. Station Road Transport Corporation, Mangalagiri Depot, Guntur Division, R/o. Mangalagiri, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director, A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, RTC X Roads, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, A.P. Station Road Transport Corporation, Guntur Region, Guntur. 3 The Deputy Chief Personnel Manager, Zonal Manager Office, A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Vijayawada, Krishna District, 4 Departmental Selection Committee, A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Guntur Division, Guntur. .....RESPONDENTS 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the petitioner is entitled for promotion to the post of Assistant Depot Clerk Of Guntur Division of A.P. State Road Transport Corporation with effect from the date on which his immediate junior namely, Mr. B.V. Ramana Rao, E-49452 (S1.No. 4 in proceedings No. P2/255 (17) 98-RM (G) , dated 30-8-98 of Respondent No. 2) was promoted as Assistant Depot Clerk by Proceedings No. P2/255(17) 98-RM (G), dt. 30-8-98 of the 2nd Respondent and consequently direct the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant Depot Clerk with effect from the date of promotion of his Immediate Junior to the post of Assistant Depot Clerk With all consequential benefits of Seniority etc. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR.T.LAKSHMI NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondents : MR.C.PRAKASH REDDY The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 26454 of 1998 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner, who is working as a Grade-II Conductor in Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, questions the action of respondents in not promoting him to the post of Assistant Depot Clerk. 2. The petitioner, was initially appointed as Grade-II Conductor on 31.05.1973 and his services were regularized with effect from 01.01.1974. Thereafter, alleging misconduct in discharge of his duties, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and he was removed from service on 27.03.1993. He has questioned the orders of his removal, before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Guntur in I.D.No.227 of 1994. Consequent to the Award of the Tribunal, he was reinstated into service on 26.11.1996. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that though some of his juniors were promoted to the post of Assistant Depot Clerk, he was illegally denied promotion. As per the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Employees’ (Recruitment) Regulations, 1966, the post of Assistant Depot Clerk is to be filled up from various feeder posts. 2% posts are reserved for Light Vehicle Drivers, 3% posts are to be filled up by promotion by selections from Depot Clerks, 20% by promotion by selection of Heavy Vehicle Drivers, and the remaining 75% are to be filled up through selection of suitable Controllers, and if there are no such candidates available, then by promotion by selection of suitable Conductors. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the petitioner was awarded punishments of censure six times in view of his involvement in cash and ticket irregularities, apart from other punishments of deferring his annual increments. It is stated that asmuch as the petitioner did not comply with the requisite conditions, he was not promoted even to the post of Grade-I Conductor. In the counter affidavit it is pleaded that as sufficient number of Grade-I Conductors are available for selection as Assistant Depot Clerks, the case of the petitioner, who was working as Grade-II Conductor, was not considered. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was not even promoted as Grade-I Conductor from the post of Grade-II Conductor. Even promotion to the post of Assistant Depot Clerk is by way of selection process as per the APSRTC Regulations. As per the selection process, it is stated that all those candidates, who were working as Grade-I Conductors, alone were considered for promotion as Assistant Depot Clerks. Asmuch as the petitioner was not even promoted to the post of Grade-I Conductor, and asmuch as the method of appointment for the post of Assistant Depot Clerk is by selection, the petitioner cannot seek direct promotion to the said post. Further, it is stated that during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has also retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation. 6. In view of the averments in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was not even promoted to the post of Grade-I Conductor, and the method of selection to the post of Assistant Depot Clerk is by way of selection process, I do not find any illegality in the action of respondents in not promoting the petitioner as Assistant Depot Clerk, particularly when Grade-I Conductors are available for promotion. 7. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 11th August 2008 ajr To 1 The Managing Director, A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, RTC X Roads, Hyderabad. 2 The Regional Manager, A.P. Station Road Transport Corporation, Guntur Region, Guntur. 3 The Deputy Chief Personnel Manager, Zonal Manager Office, A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Vijayawada, Krishna District, 4 The Departmental Selection Committee, A.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Guntur Division, Guntur.