IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.27154 of 2010 Between: Vadlanapu Rambabu … PETITIONER(S) a n d 1. High Court of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Registrar (Administration), Hyderabad and others …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.27154 of 2010 ORDER:- (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice N.Ravi Shankar) The petitioner in this writ petition is an employee/ attender in the unit of the District Court, Nalgonda. He filed this writ petition challenging the order in ROC.No.313/2009-C1 dated 11.08.2010 of the first respondent i.e. the Registrar (Administration) of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh by which he allowed the representation of one Sri L. Satyanarayana, Attender in the Additional District Court, Nalgonda (third respondent herein) and set aside the order of the District Judge by which the petitioner was promoted as Record Assistant ignoring the claims of the third respondent who is said to be senior to the petitioner in service. 2. We have gone through the impugned order dated 11.08.2010 passed by the first respondent. The third respondent whose claim was considered in the impugned order is admittedly senior to the petitioner in service. It is represented that the petitioner came to be promoted in preference to the third respondent herein on the ground that he belongs to Backward Class community and was promoted by giving reservations to Backward Class community candidates in the promotion posts. It may be noted that reservation in promotions can be given only to candidates belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under Rule 22 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Services Rules and candidates belonging to Backward Class community are not entitled to any such reservation. The petitioner is admittedly a junior to the third respondent. Hence it follows that the impugned order cannot be faulted and we therefore find no reason to interfere with it. 3. It is however brought to our notice that respondents 4 and 5 herein namely Sri T.Mallaiah and Smt P. Mangatayaramma are juniors to the petitioner and they are being continued as Record Assistants ignoring the claims of the petitioner. It is also brought to our notice that there are some vacancies of Record Assistants in the unit of District Court, Nalgonda and we therefore direct the District Judge, Nalgonda i.e. the second respondent herein to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Record Assistant if he is otherwise eligible to any existing vacancy of Record Assistant. However if no vacancy is available the District Judge shall review the promotions already granted and ensure that the petitioner’s case is considered if his juniors are being continued as Record Assistants. 4. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with the above directions. No costs. ______________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J ______________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J 22nd March 2011 CVRK