IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.6063 of 2009 Between: Battina Padma Phanendra Prasad S/o Late Subbaiah Hindu H.No.59A-13-22 Old P& TC Colony Patamata Vijayawada-520010 ..... PETITIONER AND The District & Sessions Judge Krishna Machilipatnam Krishna District .....RESPONDENT 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 an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not considering the candidature of the petitioner for the promotion from the Post Field Assistant to the Post of Junior Assistant as arbitrary illegal capricious and violative of all cannons of law and Justice apart from the gross violation of the A.P State & Subordinate Service Rules 1996 and consequently direct the respondent to promote to the post of Junior Assistant and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondent No.: G.VIDYASAGAR (SC FOR APHC) The Court made the following: Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.6063 of 2009 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Sanjay Kumar) The petitioner assails the action of the respondent, the District & Sessions Judge, Krishna District in not considering his candidature for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant as arbitrary, illegal and violative of all cannons of law. It is also alleged that the said action is violative of the A.P.State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996. The petitioner seeks consequential direction to promote him to the post of Junior Assistant. The affidavit filed in support of the writ petition discloses that the petitioner, having been appointed as Amin on 09.02.1998 was confirmed in service with effect from 10.02.1998 vide orders dated 16.10.2004. Admittedly, he made a representation on 03.11.2006 to the respondent, while he was discharging duties of a Field Assistant, to continue him in that cadre as he was not willing to be promoted to cadre of Junior Assistant for some more time. Accepting the said representation the respondent vide order dated 02.01.2007 held that the petitioner had relinquished the right of promotion to the next cadre. It is stated that subsequently, the petitioner made representations on 23.10.2008 and 02.02.2009 to the respondent to consider his case for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant, but his case was not considered for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant on the pretext that he had relinquished the right of promotion. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in the case of G.Boyanna v. High Court of A.P.[1], wherein a Division Bench of this Court held that relinquishing of promotion by an employee did not disentitle him permanently from being considered for promotion in future vacancies. Sri G.Vidyasagar, learned standing counsel, appearing on behalf of the respondent fairly admitted that the decision in G.Boyanna v. High Court of A.P. squarely applies to the facts of the present case. In the light of the aforesaid judgment, the issue raised in the writ petition does not survive for consideration afresh. The writ petition is accordingly allowed, directing the respondent to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant, in accordance with his eligibility and as per the applicable rules as and when vacancies arise. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J ____________________________ SANJAY KUMAR,J Dated: 25.03.2009 Dsr .... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The District & Sessions Judge Krishna Machilipatnam Krishna District 2 2. 2CCs to 3. 2CD copies [1] 2009(1) ALT 462 (D.B)