IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.16161 of 2009 Between: The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Praja Parishad, Warangal District ..... PETITIONER AND A.Sudharshan and 4 others .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.16161 of 2009 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V.Afzulpurkar) WVMP.No.4336/2009 is filed seeking to vacate the order of interim suspension granted in WPMP.21217/2009 on 07.08.2009. While the said vacate stay petition is taken up for hearing, both the counsel requested us to dispose of the main writ petition, as the controversy is in narrow compass. Therefore, with the consent of both sides, the writ petition itself is disposed of. Head both the counsel. The 1st respondent herein had approached the A.P.Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) by filing O.A.7199/2008 aggrieved by the inaction of the petitioner and respondents 2 to 5 in not promoting the applicant to the post of the Superintendent. The Tribunal, on consideration of the matter along with the contempt application and vacate miscellaneous application was of the view that the case of the 1st respondent herein deserves to be considered and not promoting him to the said post of Superintendent by taking his first appointment as 01.06.1986 is illegal, in view of the fact that he is senior to the 5th respondent in O.A. Consequently, the Tribunal issued directions to the petitioner and respondents 2 to 5 herein to promote the 1st respondent herein to the post of Superintendent by fixing his notional seniority, by taking his first appointment as 01.06.1986, with all consequential benefits. The aforesaid order is questioned by the writ petitioner on the ground that the Tribunal could not have given such a direction to promote the 1st respondent herein. At the stage of admission of this writ petition, we have noticed the aforesaid direction and while suspending the said operative portion of the order of the Tribunal, we had issued interim directions that the case of the 1st respondent herein shall be considered for promotion, in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent contended that though the application of the 1st respondent herein for consideration of his case for promotion is pending with the petitioner, on account of pendency of the writ petition and the interim suspension granted, the same is not being considered. We are of the view that since the controversy is only with regard to the nature of the direction, we dispose of the writ petition, modifying the operative portion of the direction of the Tribunal impugned herein by substituting it with the following directions: The petitioner herein shall consider the case of the 1st respondent herein for promotion, as directed by the Tribunal by its order in O.A.7199/2008, dated 19.06.2009. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid modification. No order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J _______________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR,J Dated: 03.02.2010 Dsr