THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR Review WPMP No.29274 of 2011 In WP NO.29196 of 2010 and CC No.915 of 2011 Between State of A.P. v. K. Suresh Kumar THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR Review WPMP No.29274 of 2011 In WP NO.29196 of 2010 and CC No.915 of 2011 Common Order: (Per Sri GM, J) This Review WPMP No.29274 of 2011 has been ﬁled seeking review of the order dated 29/11/2010 passed by this Court in W.P.No.29196 of 2010. For convenience, parties are referred by their positions in the writ petition. The writ petitioner who was initially appointed as Assistant Executive Engineer, ﬁled O.A.No.7431 of 2010 in the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad for a direction to the ﬁrst respondent-State of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal Secretary to the Government, Municipal Administration and Urban Development Department, Hyderabad to review the promotions to the posts of Executive Engineers, Superintending Engineer, Chief Engineer and Engineer-in-Chief (PH), Chief General Manager, HMWS&SB, Hyderabad by duly revising the year wise panels in respect of the said posts as per the ﬁnal seniority list dated 29-9-2010 in the category of Deputy Executive Engineers issued by the 2nd respondent-the Engineer in Chief, Public Health, Hyderabad insofar as the candidates whose ﬁxation of seniority is not in dispute and consequently grant notional promotions to him in the said higher categories before the date of his retirement. The Tribunal took up that O.A.7431 of 2010 along with other O.As., i.e. O.A.No.7185 of 2010 and 7258 of 2010 and granted interim order of status quo in the relevant miscellaneous petitions on 13-10-2010 and continued the said order of status quo until further orders by its order dated 3-11-2010. Subsequently, the writ petitioner ﬁled the present Writ Petition No.29196 of 2010 pleading the same cause of action for promotions. It appears that the petitioner has been aggrieved by the above mentioned status quo order on the ground that the respondents herein are not eﬀecting promotions even with regard to the petitioner and others whose seniority is not in dispute as per the seniority list dated 29-9-2010. He therefore ﬁled the present W.P.No.29196 of 2010 for the relief of promotion on the ground that his seniority is not in dispute. The relief actually claimed in the Writ Petition is as follows : “ … Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue order or direction more in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to review the promotions to the post of Executive Engineers, Superintending Engineer, Chief Engineer and Engineer-in-Chief by duly revising the year-wise panels in respect of the above said posts, as per the ﬁnal seniority list dated 29.9.2010 issued by the 2nd respondent in the category of Deputy Executive Engineers, insofar as the candidates whose ﬁxation of seniority is not in dispute and consequently grant notional promotions to the petitioner in the said higher categories before the date of his retirement, by duly setting aside the interim orders of status quo granted by the Hon’ble Court made in OA No.7431 of 2010 dated 3.11.2010. ” After hearing the learned Government Pleader for Services with regard to the controversy raised in the Writ Petition, this Court without going into the merits of the matter disposed of the Writ Petition No.29196 of 2010 by its order dated 29.11.2010 directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion basing on the undisputed seniority of the list mentioned in the seniority list dated 29.9.2010 as it was represented that the petitioner was going to retire by the end of December, 2011. The operative portion of the order reads as follows.: “ Therefore, to meet the ends of justice, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, respondents are directed to review the undisputed seniority/promotions in the cadre of Executive Engineers and above higher posts in pursuance of the ﬁnal seniority list dated 29.9.2010 issued by the 2nd respondent in the category of Deputy Executive Engineers, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the respondents herein, he is at liberty to ﬁle an appropriate application before the Tribunal. However, it is made clear that his order is only conﬁned to the petitioner herein and any promotion shall be subject to the result of the ﬁnal verdict passed in O.A.” Thereafter, the respondents in the writ petition have ﬁled this Review Petition. Their main plea as ampliﬁed by the learned Government Pleader is that on 29.11.2010 itself the Tribunal in MA No.3446 of 2010 in O.A.No.7258 of 2010 ﬁled by some other Executive Engineers granted interim suspension of the seniority list dated 29.9.2010 issued by the Engineer-in-Chief through his proceedings No.5499/CS1/2010 dated 29.9.2010, which is relied upon by the petitioner and as that seniority list has been suspended by the Tribunal, the authorities cannot consider the relief granted to him in the W.P.. Thereafter, this review petition has been ﬁled contending that the order passed in the Writ Petition has become unworkable as petitioner’s case cannot be singled out for promotion as cases of several to the petitioner have also to be considered for giving notional promotion before the petitioner’s case is considered for promotion. The writ petitioner ﬁled counter in the review petition. Sri T. Suryakaran Reddy, learned counsel for the writ petitioner points that the interim suspension of the seniority list dated 29.9.2010 granted by the Tribunal does not come in the way of this Court and that the direction given by this Court can be still be implemented as there cannot be any dispute with regard to the petitioner’s seniority. We have heard the Government Pleader and Sri T. Suryakaran Reddy learned counsel for the writ petitioner. It should be noted that this Court in the order dated 29.11.2010 while disposing of the Writ Petition did not express any opinion on the merits of the matter, but directed the respondents to review the undisputed seniority/promotions in the cadre of the executive engineers and other higher posts in pursuance of the seniority list dated 29.9.2010 and further made it clear that the order passed in this writ petition is only conﬁned to the petitioner herein and any promotion shall be subject to the result of the ﬁnal verdict passed in O.A.No.7431 of 2010. Thus, it is clear that this Court made only interim arrangements on the premise that the seniority list dated 29.9.2010 is in force and in view of fact that the petitioner would be going to retire by December 2011. However, that seniority list has been suspended by the Tribunal in MA No.3448 of 2010 in O.A.No.7258 of 2010. It thus follows that the said seniority list is not in operation now. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, we are of the view that until the O.As., pending before the Tribunal on seniority issue are disposed by the Tribunal and seniority list in the cadre of Deputy Executive Engineer is ﬁnalized, undertaking review of seniority and assigning notional promotion in higher cadres in respect of the petitioner on the basis of the seniority list dated 29.9.2010 leaving similarly placed persons, will amount to disparity and will lead to further complications which should be avoided. It should be noted that this Court earlier granted order on the premise that the seniority list dated 29.9.2010 is still in force, but it is not in force having been suspended by the Tribunal. It follows that the petitioner cannot get any relief even by way of interim arrangement. The Seniority issue has to be decided by the Tribunal and depending upon the result of the decision of the Tribunal on that issue the petitioner can get relief. This Court in similar circumstances by its order dated 3-8-2011 dismissed W.P.No.19783 of 2011 while refusing to grant any relief. We are therefore of the view that it is a fit case for review and the order passed by this Court dated 29.11.2010 in W.P.No.29196 of 21010 is therefore recalled and the Writ Petition No.29196 of 2010 stands dismissed. The review petition is accordingly allowed. The petitioner is also liberty to move the Tribunal seeking modiﬁcation of the orders passed if any. In view of the allowing of the review petition by dismissing the Writ Petition, we do not see any ground in the Contempt Case and it is also dismissed. _____ GM, J _____ NRS, J Kk/25-11-2011 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR Review WPMP No.29274 of 2011 In WP NO.29196 of 2010 and CC No.915 of 2011 25-11-2011