IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 23440 of 1998 Between: Killi Sankara Rao S/o Seetharama Swamy 3rd Battalion , Kakinada ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Government. of A.P rep. by its Secretary Home Department , Secretariat Buildings , Hyderabad. 2 The Director of Inspector General of Police 3rd Battalion , Hyderabad 3 The Inspector General of Police A.P.S.P., Battalion , Hyderabad 4 The Commissioner 3rd APSP Battalion Kakinada , East Godavari District. 5 T.Babu Rao MC No. 637 3rd Battalion , PASP , Kakinada. .....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 or direction especially one in the nature of the Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent 1 to 4 in not considering the seniority of the petitioner and reverting him to the post of Head Constable from the post of ARSI , leaving his juniors in the dame post as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to law and violative of Art. 14and 16 of the constitution of India and consequently , directing the respondents 1 to 4 not to implement the impugned order dated 30-7-98 passed in D.O.369/98.C.No. 2284/A.1/93-98 in so far as the petitioner is concerned , pending the disposal the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.K.CHAKRAVARTHY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD Writ Petition No.23440 of 1998 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) The petitioner is challenging his reversion from the post of ARSI to that of Head Constable in the 3rd Battalion at Kakinada. 2. The relevant details of the case may be narrated thus: The petitioner was initially appointed as Constable in the 3rd Battalion at Kakinada and subsequently promoted as Head Constable. He was further promoted as ARSI in the same Battalion. When he was reverted to the post of Head Constable to accommodate 5th respondent herein, he ﬁled O.A.No.5412 of 1998 before Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal after considering the rival contentions, directed the oﬃcial respondents to verify the seniority of the petitioner, and if found qualiﬁed and eligible, consider his case for promotion as ARSI. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader and perused the record. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was reverted to the post of Head Constable without any notice and the petitioner is fully qualiﬁed and eligible for promotion as ARSI. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner was temporarily promoted and he cannot claim to be retained in the promotion post. 5. We have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the impugned order dated 30-7-1998 reverting the petitioner to the post of Head Constable. It is seen from the order dated 01-7-1995 that the petitioner was promoted as ARSI without conferring any probationary right. The petitioner was given promotion purely on temporary basis and liable for reversion at any time and the 5th respondent, who was on deputation, was recalled and allowed to continue as ARSI, which resulted in reversion. It is to be noted that this Court directed the oﬃcial respondent concerned not to give effect to reversion order. 6. The petitioner was initially promoted as ARSI purely on temporary basis and without conferring any probationary right, but he appears to be continuing as ARSI pursuant to the interim order of this Court. Having regard to the facts and circumstances prevailing at this length of time, we deem it appropriate to direct the authority concerned to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion as ARSI in accordance with the relevant Rules, if he is eligible and fully qualified. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ________________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J. 05-09-2008 Bsc