THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR W.P.Nos.24000, 2887 & 23994 of 2010 COMMON ORDER: ( Per GM,J) Since the issue involved in all these three writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this common order. The claim of the unofficial respondents, who are applicants in the OA, is that they are eligible and qualified for promotion to the post of School Assistant in their respective subjects as they have completed two years B.Ed., course. The cases of the un-official respondents were not considered in the promotion counseling held on 29-1-2009 on the premise that their final year B.Ed examination results have not been announced by then. The OAs filed by the unofficial respondents disposed of with a direction to the respondents therein to issue promotion orders posting the unofficial respondents as School Assistants by keeping in view of the instructions issued by the Director and Commissioner of School Education dated 10-10-2001, within a period of two weeks. Challenging the same, the present writ petitions have been preferred. The short point that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is that whether the applicants- un-official respondents are entitled for promotion to the post of School Assistant. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I contends that the applicants did not possess the essential qualification of B.Ed., degree as on 1-9-2008 and thus, they are ineligible for promotion as School Assistants. He further contends that it is mandatory to possess the qualification prescribed before the process for promotion is taken up and actual date of promotion is not relevant. He also contends that the teachers, who are eligible as on the original date of counseling i.e., 29-1-2009 had been considered for promotion and that the candidates, whose results were published after the date of counseling, cannot be treated as qualified. He further contends that the applicants have not qualified in the B.Ed., examination as on 29-1-2009. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that if the petitioners taken cut of date as 1-9-2008 for eligibility criteria for the panel year 2008-2009, they have to compute the vacancies up to 31- 8-2009. He further submits that the petitioners never followed Rule 6 of the General Rules by following the panel year for effecting promotion to the post of School Assistant and that putting the cut of date as 1-9-2008 is illegal. He further submits that in similar set of circumstances the candidates who are qualified subsequent to the cut of date i.e., 1-9-2008 have been considered for promotion. He further submits that the petitioners are not following the rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.15 for promotion taking the qualifying date as 1st September of the year. He also submits that the respondents are entitled to the promotion and the impugned orders need no interference. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. A perusal of the material brought on record goes to show that the Commissioner & Director of School Education vide proceedings dated 19-2-2009 issued instructions to all the DEOs/RJDSEs to the effect that the promotion counseling for the post of Head Master Gr.II and School Assistant should be started on 29-1-2009 and that the teachers who are eligible as on the original date of counseling i.e., 29-1-2009 have to be considered for promotion in the counseling. As the applicants had not qualified in the B.Ed., examinations as on 29-1-2009, their cases were not considered for promotion by the promotion counseling committee. Further, vide G.O.Ms.15, Education Department dated 26-1-2009 the Government notified Special Rules. As per Rule 2, 1st September of the year is reckoned as qualifying date to detune eligibility. For better appreciation, it may be extracted hereunder : “The appointing authorities shall draw panels of eligible School Assistants for appointment by transfer to the post of Head Master Gr.II Gazetted and lists of SGTs and equivalent categories for promotion to the posts of School Assistant and equivalent categories for promotion to the posts of School Assistant and equivalent categories every year duly assessing the vacancies of the respective categories from 1st September to 31st August of succeeding year, arising due to retirement, promotions etc. 1st September of the year will be reckoned as qualifying date to determine the eligibility of candidates. The panel list shall be drawn in consultation with the Selection Committees as per Rule 6 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 as amended from time to time and the instructions issued thereon.” In view of the above Rule, the cut of date for eligibility was 1-9-2008 for the panel prepared for the year 2008- 2009. According to Rule 6 of Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules a fit list has to be prepared for promotion to the post of School Assistant and equivalent categories every year duly assessing the vacancies of respective category from 1st September to 31st August of succeeding year arising due to retirement, promotion etc. Even as per the said Rule, the respondents are not eligible for promotion as they appeared for the qualifying examination held from 19-12-2008 to 30-12-2008 i.e., after the cut off date. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that the respondents did not possess the essential qualification of B.Ed., as on 1-9- 2008, we have no hesitation to hold that the orders of the Tribunal are not sustainable and therefore, they are liable to be set aside. In the result, all the writ petitions are allowed setting aside the orders impugned herein. No costs. ___________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J _____________ K.G.SHANKAR,J rkk Dated: 19-7-2011