HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU Writ Petition No.20305 of 2007 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed seeking to set aside the order dated 10-09-2007 passed in O.A.No.6529 of 2006 on the file of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. 2. Respondent No.6 herein filed the above O.A. challenging the combined seniority list issued vide G.O.Rt.No.1548 PR & RD (MDL.III) Department, dated 01-09-2005 and proceedings No.2118/CPR&RE/K1/2006 dated 19-07- 2006 issued by the second respondent. The Tribunal after considering the rival contentions, directed the official respondents to prepare the seniority list in the category of VDOs Grade-II/I men and women, in terms of the directives contained in G.O.Rt.No.1207 dated 13-8-2004 and issue common seniority list of Zone-I and effect promotions to the cadre of Executive Officer, PR & RD. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner – respondent No.6 in O.A. filed this writ petition. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that though the petitioner was made party to O.A., no notice was given to several other employees who are going to be affected. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 supported the impugned order. 5. Admittedly, the Government had issued G.O.Rt.No.720 dated 02-5-2002 asking the Collectors to prepare the inter se seniority of the VDOs, both men and women, in terms of Rule 33 read with Rule 36 of A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules and the same was done. The Government confirmed the combined seniority list issued by 2nd respondent vide G.O.Rt.No.1548 dated 01-9-2005. Thereafter, G.O.Rt.No.1207 dated 13-8-2004 was issued, which contained the guidelines for preparing the revised seniority list. The Government relaxed Rule 33(a) and directed the second respondent to prepare the revised seniority list, which appears to have not been done, and thus the final seniority list was not issued even though the objections have been called for. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, we direct the authority concerned to issue notice to all the affected employees and prepare an integrated seniority list, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. Till such time, any promotions made shall not be disturbed. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ___________________ C.V.RAMULU, J. 17-07-2008 bsc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 20305 of 2007 Between: P.V.V.V.M.Mohan Kumar S/o.Govinda rao Mandal Parishad, Ranasthalam, Srikakulam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Panchayat Raj & Rural Employment, Urdu Galli Lane, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad. 3 The chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Srikakulam, Srikakulam District. 4 The chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. 5 The chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 6 M.Srinivasa Rao S/o.Kondal Rao Thamada, Laveru Mandal, Srikakulam District. .....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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus to set aside the order of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A.No.6529 of 2006 dt. 10.09.2007 and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.SATYAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following :