THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.1471 of 2010 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) This writ petition is by the applicant in O.A.No.1430 of 2008 aggrieved by the order, dated 20.10.2009 of the learned Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. The O.A. was filed for a declaration that the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Administrative Officer in the Transport department on the ground of pendency of a criminal case against him though he was fully eligible and qualified, is illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and for a consequent direction to the respondents therein to promote him as Administrative Officer, without reference to the pending criminal case. By the impugned order herein, the O.A. was dismissed on the ground that in terms of the orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.424 GA (Ser:C) Department, dated 25.05.1976, the relevant DPC had considered the case of the petitioner and decided that in view of the pendency of an ACB trap case against him and his suspension during the period 21.05.2005 to 21.11.2007 not being regularized, the promotion of the petitioner should be deferred. There against is the writ petition filed, as already stated. It requires to be noticed that in the O.A. as well as in this writ petition, the only respondents arrayed as such are (1) The Deputy Transport Commissioner Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Warangal, (2) The Commissioner of Transport of A.P., Hyderabad, and (3) The Principal Secretary to Government of A.P., Transport Department. It is not the case of the petitioner expressly or by any compelling implication that he is in the personal employment of the respondents who are also civil servants by designation and do not per se constitute the State. It is axiomatic that the State is a constitutional and juristic entity entitled to and obligated as well to be impleaded by its constitutional label as the Republic of India/Union of India or the State of A.P., as the case may be and cannot be properly said to be impleaded by merely impleading a State actor, be it by designation. As the State, which is a necessary and proper party was not impleaded in the O.A., the Tribunal would not and ought not to have and had no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate upon the grievance presented by the petitioner before it. For reasons alike, no relief can be granted to the petitioner in respect of the specific relief herein namely invalidation of the order of the Tribunal on account of its intrinsic errors as alleged on the merits and its decision. On the aforesaid analysis, this writ petition is dismissed on the singular ground that O.A.No.1430 of 2008 as framed and without impleading the State of Andhra Pradesh was not maintainable and the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, had no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the issues presented in such a O.A. There shall be no order as to costs. All the observations made in the order of learned Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in O.P.No.1430 of 2008 stands effaced and the O.A. dismissed as not maintainable. It is open to the petitioner to pursue appropriate remedies afresh before the learned Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in accordance with law. _____________________________ JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM _________________________ JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 14th June 2010 dr