IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9399 of 2008 Between: P.Nageswara Rao, S/o. P.Babu Rao, S.K.V.T.College, Rajahmundry, E.G.District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Director of Collegiate Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Prl.Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 Sri Kandukuri Veeresalingam Theistic College, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. rep by its Correspondent. ...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 direction more in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not considering the appeal filed by the petitioner, dated 26.02.2008 against the proceedings of the 3rd respondent, dated 29.01.2008 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art.14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the 1st respondent to consider the appeal, dated 26.02.2008 filed by the petitioner within the time to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.SUDHIR KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following : O R D E R: The petitioner is working as a Senior Grade Lecturer in English, in the 3rd respondent college. Initially, provisional seniority list of the said category was published on 24.4.2007, and thereafter, a final seniority list on 29.01.2008. Petitioner claims to have submitted an appeal to the 1st respondent, questioning the correctness of the seniority list dated 29.01.2008. His grievance is that no orders have been passed thereon, and seeks appropriate direction, in this regard. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Higher Education. The petitioner approached the 1st respondent with an appeal, assailing the correctness of the final seniority list prepared by the 3rd respondent, for the post of Senior Grade Lecturers. Seniority would have its own impact, in the context of promotions, or other assignments. It is in the interest of the institution, as well as the concerned individual, that the appeal is disposed of at the earliest. The writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to pass orders on the appeal presented by the petitioner, against the seniority list, dated 29.1.2008, within a period of three months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, duly giving opportunity to the affected parties. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ 28th April 2008 PAN