HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.NO.10341 OF 2000 Dt/25.11.2010 Between: S.B.Anjaiah ..Petitioner And Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Hyderabad, rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director and another ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH W.P.NO.10341 OF 2000 ORDER: Petitioner questions the proceedings of the respondents dated 4.5.2000 in changing his seniority in the cadre of Driver Grade-II from 18.7.1979 to 11.6.1981 and the consequential promotion to the Special Grade and Grade-I Driver as illegal and arbitrary and also to set aside the transfer order dated 5.6.1981 in stipulating the condition that he will forego the seniority in the transfer post. The petitioner was appointed as Driver Grade-II in the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC) on 18.7.1979 at Hyderabad-II Depot and has been transferred to Uppal Depot of City Region on 11.6.1981 on loss of seniority and became junior most Driver Grade II vide transfer order dated 5.6.1981. As such his seniority has been reckoned from 11.6.1981, the date on which he joined in Uppal Depot, which fact was said to have been communicated by letter, dated 12.5.1998. He was placed on special grade with effect from 1.5.1992 and promoted as Driver Grade-I with effect from 1.7.1992 counting his seniority from the date of his initial appointment i.e., 18.7.1979. It is the case of the respondents that the petitioner is not entitled for promotion with effect from 1.7.1992 in the transferred division and therefore the promotion given to him with effect from 1.5.1992 taking into account his seniority from the initial date of appointment i.e., 18.7.1979 is erroneous and contrary to law and he is entitled to special grade with effect from 1.8.1994 and Grade-I promotion with effect from 1.7.1996 since his seniority was reckoned in the Uppal Division with effect from 11.6.1981. For the show cause notice issued by the 2nd respondent dated 6.5.1999 calling upon him to submit explanation as to why the special grade and Grade-I promotion shall not be cancelled, the petitioner submitted his explanation. After considering the explanation, the respondent passed the impugned order stating that the special grade sanctioned to him with effect from 1.7.1992 is illegal and erroneous and he is entitled for special grade only with effect from 1.8.1994 and for Grade-I with effect from 1.7.1996 instead of 1.5.1992 and 1.7.1992. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while promoting the petitioner for the special grade with effect from 1.5.1992 and also while promoting him as Grade-I with effect from 1.7.1992, none of his juniors even in the transfer depot was ignored and taking into account his seniority from the date of initial appointment, the said promotions were rightly granted as per Rules and therefore none of his juniors have raised any objection when he was promoted. It is further submitted that as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Union of India v. C.N.Ponnappan[1] the service rendered by an employee at the place from where he was transferred his service in the appointed depot as well as transfer depot has to be taken into account for the purpose of leave and retiral benefits. The fact that as a result of transfer he is placed at the bottom of the seniority list at the place of transfer does not wipe out his service at the place from where he was transferred. The said service, being regular service in the grade, has to be taken into account as part of his experience for the purpose of eligibility for promotion and it cannot be ignored only on the ground that it was not rendered at the place he has been transferred. The service of such employee has to be counted as experience for the purpose of eligibility for promotion at the place from where he has been transferred. It is stated that as per Rules all employees who have completed 12 years of service are automatically entitled for promotion for special grade. It is stated that when he was promoted for special grade it was given after completing 12 years alone without ignoring any of his juniors. But, the respondents have not stated either in the impugned order or in the counter about ignoring any of his juniors and it is not also stated as to how the petitioner is not entitled for promotion for special grade with effect from 1.5.1992 and Grade-I promotion with effect from 1.7.1992 and the relevant rules are not mentioned either in the impugned order or in the counter. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the impugned order is unsustainable. Accordingly, the impugned order 4.5.2000 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the 2nd respondent to consider the matter afresh after issuing show cause notice to the petitioner afresh quoting relevant rules and after giving reasonable opportunity of two weeks for submitting explanation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. 25.11.2010 kpr [1] AIR 1996 SC 764