HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO. 1122 OF 2011 Between: Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Tirupati ………….Appellant AND K. Amarnath Reddy ………….Respondent JUDGMENT : (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Appeal was preferred by the respondent- Devasthanam against the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge, who disposed of the writ petition instituted by the respondent with a direction to prepare a provisional seniority list and then call for objections, if any, from the candidates who would be affected, and thereafter prepare the final seniority list in accordance with law within a period of three months. The respondent-writ petitioner was initially appointed as NMR Work Inspector in the year 1986 for the appellant-Devasthanam. He possesses the diploma qualification of LCE. His services along with others came to be regularized with effect from 1.8.1991 and subsequently he was promoted as Draftsman Grade-II and also as an Assistant Engineer (Civil). As the respondent-Devasthanam has not prepared the seniority list at all, he instituted Writ Petition as the representations submitted by the writ petitioner as well as others were not produced any desired result. The learned counsel for the appellant contend that several others may be adversely affected by the directions issued by the learned Single Judge. In the absence of any such person as party respondents to the writ petition, the learned Single Judge ought not to have disposed of the Writ Petition. Further by passing the orders at the admission stage, the appellant-Devasthanam was denied a fair opportunity to contest the case. We have perused the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge has not decided any list, and he merely directed the appellant- Devasthanam to prepare the provisional seniority list inviting objections and thereafter finalise the same within a period of three months. Therefore, it is a case where the learned Single Judge has decided any dispute or pronounced any opinion on merits of the claim of the writ petitioner for seniority. It is a simple case of directing the appellant-Devasthanam to undertake the necessary exercise for preparation of seniority list. When once several persons have been employed in an establishment and the right to be considered for promotion is depending upon the eligibility criteria and qualification and also seniority, it is imperative that an inter se seniority list of the employees working in the unit should be prepared and published. The principles of preparation of seniority list will have to be evolved first on that basis and provisional seniority list has got to be prepared and objections from the candidates invited. Only after examining the objections raised, necessary final decision can be taken in the matter and then a finalised seniority list can be published. Therefore, in our opinion, the direction issued by the learned Single Judge does not call for any interference at our hands. Since the learned counsel for the appellant- Devasthanam has made a grievance that three months period would be inadequate, we consider it appropriate to grant the appellant-Devasthanam, six months time for preparation and publication of the provisional seniority list inviting objections and thereafter to finalise the same. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J ________________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J DATE: 09.12.2011 KA ... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies.