IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6647 of 2000 Between: K.V. Reddy, S/o. Rami Reddy, Sattenapalli, Guntur. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The A.P.S.R.T.C., Represented by its Managing Director, Musheerabad, Hyderabad. 2 The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep. by its Divisional Manager, Guntur Region, Guntur, Guntur District. 3 The A.P.S.R.T.C., Rep by its Regional Manager, Guntur Region, Guntur, Guntur District. 4 The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Sattenapalli Depot, Sattenapalli, Guntur District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents herein in not counting my seniority from the date of my appointment i.e. 21-11-1973 and fixing my seniority at Sl. No.34 of the seniority list of Narasaraopet Division as on 31-12-98 below the juniors to me as illegal, unjust and against to principles of natural justice, contrary to Reg.3(a) of APSRTC., Service Regulations 1964 which was upheld by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.1885/93 dated 9-7-98 and as such the same is liable to be set aside with a consequential direction to the respondents herein to count the seniority of the Petitioner from the date of his Original appointment i/e. on 22.-11-73 and to pay the arrears of consequential benefits forthwith in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. S.M. Subhan Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. C. Prakash Reddy (SC FOR APSRTC) The Court made the following Order: The petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not counting his seniority in the cadre of mechanics with effect from 21-11-1973 in Narasaraopet division as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The petitioner was appointed as mechanic in Kurnool division on 21-11-1973 and posted at Atmakur and later he was transferred from Atmakur to Macherla depot in Guntur division on 10-06-1976 at his own request. In the year 1991, a provisional seniority list in the category of mechanics was published, asking the employees to submit their objections, if any, regarding their ranking in the said list and when no representations were received a final seniority list was published on 09-09-1991. 3. It is stated that though the petitioner submitted objections to the second respondent stating that, in the seniority list, he is shown below the persons junior to him, no action whatsoever is taken and order dated 10-02-1992 is communicated to him stating that his claim for seniority from the date of his initial appointment cannot be accepted. 4. In this case, it is to be seen that the petitioner was initially appointed on 21-11-1973 in Kurnool division and later transferred to Narasaraopet division in Guntur District and reported at Macherla depot on 10-06-1976. In the order dated 10-02-1992 passed by the Divisional Manager, Narasaraopet, it is stated that, in the order dated 19-04-1976, whereby the petitioner was transferred from Kurnool division to Narasaraopet division in Guntur District, it is clearly mentioned that he should become the junior-most mechanic in the division to which he is transferred. The petitioner is transferred from Kurnool division to Narasaraopet division in Guntur District on his own request and in the order of transfer it is clearly stated that, as the transfer is done on his own request, he should forego his seniority and take the last ranking among mechanics in the division to which he is transferred. The petitioner, having availed the benefit of the said order of transfer, cannot now turn around and contend that he is entitled for seniority from the date of his initial appointment in Kurnool Division. Although the petitioner relies on Regulation 3(a) of the A.P.S.R.T.C. Employees’ Service Regulations, 1964, in support of his claim that his seniority should be reckoned from the date of his initial appointment, i.e. 21-11-1973, but when each division is a unit for the purpose of appointment and promotion and he was transferred from one division to other on his own request, he cannot seek any directions as prayed for. 5. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed, however, in the circumstances, without any order as to costs. _____________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. February 25, 2009 MRR