IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 82 of 2006 Between: B.Ramesh, S/o.Krishna Murhty, A.P.Vikalangual Coop.Corp. Santhinagar, Industrial Estate Suryapet (post), nalgonda ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Commissioner, Disabled Welfare & State Commissioner under Programme with Disabilities Act 1955, Govt of A.P. 6th floor, Chandravihar, M.J.Road Nampally, Hyderabad 2 The Managing Director, A.P.Vikalangula Coop.Corpn., BRK Bldgs., Hyderabad .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner case for the post of the production Manager in the promoted category while promoting his juniors who are not qualified as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and contrary to the articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of india and further direct the 2nd respondent to promote the petitioner to the post of production Manager w.e.f.1995 with all consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner:SMT.A.CHAYA DEVI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR WOMEN DEV. & CHILD WELFARE The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner was initially appointed as Helper(Technical), on daily wage basis, in the year 1984. Vide proceedings, dated 01.09.1984, he was placed in the pay scale of Rs.290-425. The same was revised to Rs.350-550, on 01.11.1986. At present, the petitioner is working in the same post, with enhanced pay scale. He states that he is eligible to be promoted to the post of Production Manager in the first respondent-Organization. His grievance is that though he made several representations and though the first respondent has even called for the remarks of the second respondent, in the context of promotion, no response is forthcoming. He, accordingly, seeks a declaration and consequential direction in this Writ Petition, in relation to his promotion to the post of Production Manager. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. There is no representation for the respondents. The regulations relating to service conditions of the employees in the second respondent provide, inter alia, for promotion to the post of Production Manager, which occurs at serial No.6, in annexure 2. The method of appointment to that post is by way of direct recruitment as well as promotion from the post of Helper (Technical) with service of 5 years. If the petitioner had fulfilled the qualifications and there exists any clear vacancy, the second respondent is under obligation to consider his case and pass necessary orders. If there are any hurdles in effecting promotion of the petitioner, the same are to be informed to the petitioner. The matter cannot be kept pending indefinitely. For the foregoing reasons, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the second respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Production Manager and pass appropriate orders within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, duly verifying whether the petitioner fulfils the prescribed qualifications. It is further directed that, in case the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Production Manager becomes impossible, or impermissible, for any reason, the same shall be intimated to the petitioner, within two months. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt:18.06.2006 GJ