IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.16226 of 2009 Between: 1 The Secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh Panchayat Raj and Rural Development , Secretariat Hyderabad 2 The Commissioner of Panchayat Raj Rural Employment Near Urdu Hall, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 G.Purushotham , Mandal Parishad Development officer (Retd), R/o.H.No.8-3-30/3, Panchayat colony Mettugadda, Mahaboobnagar District 2 The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla parishad, Mahaboobnagar (R2 is formal party as no relief is sought against him) .....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 to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the orders of the Hon`ble AP Admn.Tribunal, Hyderabad passed in OA.No.907/2002 dated 12.12.2008 as being erroneous illegal, and unreasonable and quash the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.16226 of 2009 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V.Afzulpurkar) This state has filed this writ petition questioning the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal’) in O.A.907/2002 dated 12.12.2008. 2. The 1st respondent herein is a retired Mandal Parishad Development Officer. He approached the Tribunal questioning the orders of the 1st petitioner herein in Memo No.7229/Accts.1/A1/99, dated 12.02.2001 wherein his case for notional promotion on par with his junior as an Accounts Officer has been wrongly denied. On considering the contentions on either side, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that earlier, when the juniors of the respondent who were considered by the said post of Accounts Officer, the 1st respondent’s case was overlooked as there was a punishment imposed on him in a disciplinary case. It was also found by the Tribunal that the said punishment was set aside by the appellate authority, and as such, the case of the 1st respondent/applicant ought to have been considered in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.424, General Administration (Services-C) Department, dated 25.05.1976. 3. Based on the above, the Tribunal allowed the O.A. and directed the petitioners herein to give notional promotion to the 1st respondent/applicant on par with his juniors and revise his pay and pension expeditiously. The said order is challenged in the present writ petition. 4. We do not see any merits in the aforesaid challenge inasmuch as admittedly, the punishment imposed against the 1st respondent/applicant was set aside and his juniors were considered ignoring his claim and hence the respondent is entitled to be considered for the said promotion in terms of the G.O. referred to above. We do not see any error or any grounds warranting interference with the impugned order. The Writ Petition is meritless and is accordingly dismissed. However, no order as to costs. ___________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J ___________________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR,J Dated: 10.08.2009 Dsr