THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU Friday, 18th day of January,2008 W.P.No.450 of 2008 Between:- Dr. B. Ramachandraiah & others … Petitioners and The Union of India, represented by its Principal Secretary, Medical & Health, New Delhi and others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P.No.450 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation filed by the petitioners on 19-2-2007, on merits, within a reasonable time. It appears, petitioners are all in the cadre of Assistant Civil Surgeon working in various Departments of Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Kadapa. The grievance of the petitioners seems to be that they are all Post Graduate Diploma holders in respective faculties and though they are working from a considerable period, their cases are not being considered for appointment as Assistant Professor/Associate Professor/Professor in the respective faculties/Departments. According to the petitioners, they all have put in sufficient number of years of service, but fresh Post-Graduate Degree holders are appointed to head the Department and the Diploma holders are either shifted to some other place or they would be asked to work under fresh Post Graduate Degree holders. Further, there are no rules available guiding the appointment of Post Graduate Degree holders as Assistant Professors/Associate Professors/Professors. Therefore, it is obligatory on the part of a model employer like the State of Andhra Pradesh, which is again governed by the Rules made by the Medical Council of India, to adopt a reasonable policy for providing promotional avenues to the Diploma holders, who are working as Assistant Civil Surgeons in various Departments and in the absence of such a policy, it is nothing but invidious discrimination between P.G. Degree holders and P.G. Diploma holders. Further, it is painful for the diploma holders with long standing of service to work under fresh P.G. Degree holders. It is always desirable to remove such element of invidious discrimination between two classes of Doctors working in the State of Andhra Pradesh. In the absence of Rules, petitioners have made representation to the Government of India and the respondents herein on 19-2-2007 ventilating their grievances in detail, but till date, there is no response from the respondents. Whereas, learned counsel for respondents 3 and 4 strenuously contended that this being a service matter, even if it is a policy, it is for the petitioners to approach the A.P. Administrative Tribunal and work out the remedies as available under the law and a Writ Petition of this nature is not maintainable. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the relief as sought for in this Writ Petition cannot be granted by the Administrative Tribunal, because, firstly, it is a policy matter and secondly, the policy is wholly depended upon the advice and Rules made by the Medical Council of India followed by the Medical Council of the State. Therefore, it may not be proper for the petitioners to approach the Administrative Tribunal in this regard, particularly in the absence of any Rules made for the purpose of considering their promotion to the post of Assistant Professor/Associate Professor/Professor. I am in full agreement with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners that this is a case where the policy has to be made by the Medical Council of India to be followed by the Medical Council of Andhra Pradesh and thereafter the Rules may have to be made by the Medical and Health Department of Government of Andhra Pradesh. Further, the relief sought, in this Writ Petition, is innocuous. What all the petitioners are seeking is to direct the respondents to consider the representation purported to have been made by them on 19-2-2007. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on merits, respondents are directed to consider the representation purported to have been made by the petitioner on 19-2-2007 and pass appropriate orders, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order and communicate the same to the petitioners. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 18-1-2008 prk