*THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.14171 of 2008 % 12.08.2008 Between: K.Mahipal Reddy .... PETITIONER AND The Registrar, JNTU, Kukatpally, Hyderabad and others. ...RESPONDENTS ! COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER: Sri B.Sai Ram Goud ^ COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENTS 1 and 2 : Sri Rathangapani Reddy ^ COUNSER FOR RESPONDNETS 3 to 5 : Sri G.Vidya Sagar < Gist: > Head Note: ? CITATIONS: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14171 of 2008 Between: K.Mahipal Reddy S/o.K.Raji Reddy College of Fine Arts,Masab Tank, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The REgistrar, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 2 The Principla, JNTU,College of Fine Arts, Masab Tank, Hyderabad 3 Yadagiri S/o.Not known of JNTU Campus and Working as Superintendent JNTU Campus, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 4 Sri.M.A.S.Giri S/o.Not known of JNTU Campus and Working as Senior Assistant JNTU Campus(Establishment section) Kukatpally, Hyderabad 5 S.Lakshminarayana S/o.Not known JNTU,C.F.A., Masab Tank,Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 or order more particularlyone in the nature of writ of certiorari call for the records pertains to the impugned proceedings Memo No.C3/7737/2008 dated 30.6.2008 rejecting the request of the petitioner issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to promote the petitioner to the post of Superintendent as per the sneniority list prepared and issued by the 1st respondent in respect of Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kukatpally, Hyderabad and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.SAI RAM GOUD Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.RATHANGA PANI REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14171 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner was initially appointed as a Lumpsum Clerk on 24.02.1987 by the Principal of the JNTU College of Fine Arts. This was extended twice and ultimately, he was appointed as a Junior Assistant in the same college in the pay scale of Rs.425-650, vide proceedings, dated 14.02.1987, issued by the Principal. His services in the post of Junior Assistant were regularized, vide proceedings dated 24.07.1993. He was promoted as Senior Assistant on 12.08.2005. The next higher post is that of Superintendent. The case of the petitioner was not considered for the post of Superintendent, on the ground that he did not hold the requisite qualification prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.517, General Administration Department, dated 29.10.1987, which was adopted by the University; for the post of Junior Assistant. The petitioner made a representation in this regard on 20.02.2008. When the same was not considered, he approached this Court by filing W.P.No.7095 of 2008. The writ petition was disposed of on 03.04.2008, directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner. In compliance with the said direction, the Registrar of the University issued a memo, dated 30.06.2008. It was observed that the case of the petitioner cannot be considered for promotion to the post of Superintendent, since he did not hold the qualification viz., pass in Intermediate, when he was appointed to the post of Junior Assistant. The petitioner contends that though G.O.Ms.No.517 prescribed Intermediate as the minimum qualification for the post of Junior Assistant, exception was carved out in favour of the persons, who were already appointed; and inasmuch as he passed S.S.C. before he was appointed as Junior Assistant, he is covered by the exception. On behalf of respondents 1 and 2, a counter affidavit is filed, reiterating the stand taken in the impugned proceedings. Respondents 3 to 5 have also filed separate counter affidavits. Heard Sri B.Sai Ram Goud, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rathangapani Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri G.Vidya Sagar, learned counsel for respondents 3 to 5. It is a matter of record that the University adopted the A.P. Ministerial Service Rules and applied the same to its employees. The said Rules were amended by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.517. Up to that date, the qualification for the post of Junior Assistant was ‘pass in S.S.C.’. The relevant rules were amended, prescribing ‘pass in Intermediate’ as qualification for the post of Junior Assistant. Rules 3, 22 and 28 were correspondingly amended. The petitioner came to be appointed as Junior Assistant on regular basis subsequent to this G.O. i.e., on 14.12.1987. If it were to have been the first entry of the petitioner into the service of the University, the appointment itself was invalid and he could not have claimed any rights, much less, the one for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant. There is no dispute that the petitioner is appointed as “Lumpsum Clerk” before 29.10.1987. G.O.Ms.No.517 has carved out certain exceptions in favour of the persons, who have been appointed earlier to it, either Record Assistants or Members of equivalent categories in other services or Members of A.P. Last Grade Services. The exceptions are of two types. The first one, as provided for under clause (b) of sub-rule (14) of Rule 3, is that in case, the appointment into the categories, referred to above, was prior to 29.10.1987, the candidates are entitled to be appointed as Junior Assistants, provided that they possess minimum general educational qualification and have put in not less than five years of regular service. Rule 22 provides that in case, the appointment is in the Offices of Heads of Departments and Directorates prior to 15.12.1984, or in other offices prior to 29.10.1987, the exception would operate in favour of candidates, who have passed S.S.C. or any equivalent examination, without the necessity of 5 years service. The post held by the petitioner prior to 29.10.1987 would certainly fall into one of the categories mentioned in clause (b) of Sub-Rule (14) of Rule 3 viz., Record Assistants or Members of equivalent categories in other services or Members of A.P. Last Grade Services. The proviso added to Rule 22, which prescribes the general qualifications, naturally gets attracted to the facts of the case. It is not in dispute that the petitioner held S.S.C. qualification as on 29.10.1987 and therefore, it cannot be said that he was disentitled for being appointed. The University itself has regularized the services of the petitioner in the post of Junior Assistant and thereafter, promoted him to the post of Senior Assistant. At this stage, the petitioner cannot be denied the benefit of promotion to the post of Superintendent. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. It is directed that the case of the petitioner shall be considered for the post of Superintendent on the basis of his seniority in the post of Senior Assistant. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 12.08.2008 Note: L.R.copy to be marked. (B/o) JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14171 of 2008 Date: 12.08.2008 JSU