THE HON’BLE MS.JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.16306 OF 2009 Dt.09.10.2009 Between: S.K.Padma ……….Petitioner Vs. The Executive Director, APSRTC, Hyderabad City Zone, JBS, Picket, Secunderabad and two others. ……..Respondents. O R D E R: The petitioner herein is working as Senior Assistant (Finance), in the office of the Deputy Chief Accounts Officer of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Hyderabad City Zone. 2) This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the first respondent in not promoting the petitioner to the post of Deputy Superintendent (Finance) as arbitrary and illegal and further to set aside the order, dt.01.08.2009, wherein respondent Nos.2 and 3 herein were promoted to the posts of Deputy Superintendent (Finance). 3) It is not in dispute that as per the final seniority list of Senior Assistants (Finance), the writ petitioner is at S.No.52, whereas respondent Nos.2 and 3 are at S.Nos.56 and 57. However without calling her for selections, the Respondent No.1 had promoted Respondents 2 & 3 to the post of Deputy Superintendent. Aggrieved by the said action this writ petition is filed. 4) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and perused the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent. Despite notice, the respondents 2 and 3 did not choose to appear. 5) The material on record shows that by proceedings, dt. 27.11.2008, the first respondent informed all the Depot Managers to direct 14 Senior Assistants including the writ petitioner, to attend the interview on 10.12.2008, for the purpose of selection for promotion to the posts of Deputy Superintendent (Finance). It was also made clear in the said proceedings that if any employee is on long leave or sick leave, the date of interview shall be informed to such employee by registered post with acknowledgment due, duly filing a copy of the letter under intimation to the office of the fist respondent. 6) Admittedly by the date of the said proceedings, the petitioner was on leave on medical grounds. The petitioner alleges that taking advantage of her absence in the office, without informing her the date of interview, the first respondent had proceeded with the selections and by order, dt. 01.08.2009, promoted respondents 2 and 3 herein to the post of Deputy Superintendent (Finance), in spite of the fact that the petitioner is senior to them. 7) The petitioner is senior to respondent Nos.2 and 3 is not in dispute. The fact that she has given her willingness for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent (Finance) is also not in dispute. So far as the petitioner’s allegation that she was not informed the date of interview, the only explanation offered in the counter affidavit is that as she was on leave, the date of interview was informed on telephone. The procedure adopted by the first respondent is apparently contrary to the instructions in the proceedings dated 27.11.2008. 8) In the circumstances, the action of the first respondent in ignoring the petitioner’s case for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent (Finance) amounts to arbitrary exercise of power and can not be sustained. 9) Having regard to the admitted fact that the petitioner was not informed about the date of interview by registered post as specified in the proceedings dt.27.11.2008, the plea of the first respondent that the petitioner had remained absent to the selections, cannot be accepted. The further contention that the petitioner who had been availing sick leave frequently, cannot perform the duties of Deputy Superintendent (Finance) is also untenable, since the petitioner was never given an opportunity to meet the said allegation. 10) For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to take appropriate steps for constitution of the Selection Committee and consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent (Finance) and in case she is found eligible, she shall be promoted to the said post with effect from the date on which, the respondents 2 and 3 herein were given promotion. Such exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. 11) The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ___________ G.ROHINI J., Dt.09.10.2009 tjs