IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 14649 of 1999 Between: M. Venkatramaiah S/o Chengaiah, State Institute of Educational Technology Society, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Director, State Institute of Educational Technology Society, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad 2. State Institute of Educational Technology Society, Rep. by Ex-Officio Chairman-cum-Secretary to Govt. School Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction mostly one which is in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in promoting the petitioner to the post of producer and deeping the vancancy from the last 5 years even thoug eligible and suitable person is available for promotion as illegal, irregular, arbirtrary, unreasonalble, unconstitutional and unsustainable and direct the respondents to forthwith consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of producer on the basis of channel of promotions and rules in force in all India Radio, Doordarsan, Central Institute of Educational Techgnology and National Council of Educational Research and Training, Government of India and pass such other order or orders as it may deem fit. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.VEERA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : ORDER : The petitioner filed this Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in promoting the petitioner to the post of Producer and keeping the vacancy from the last 5 years even though eligible and suitable person is available for promotion as illegal, irregular, arbitrary and unreasonable. 2. Initially the name of the Government Pleader for School Education alone is printed and the Government Pleader for School Education who was present and submitted that the matter relates to the Central Government. Hence, this Court directed the office to print the name of the Assistant Solicitor General. When the names of the Government Pleader as well as the Assistant Solicitor General was printed, the learned Assistant Solicitor General has submitted that the Central Government has nothing to do with this case and it is only the Government Pleader for School Education who has to answer the point involved in this writ petition and at the request of the learned Government Pleader the matter was adjourned. 3. Today when the matter is taken up, neither the learned Assistant Solicitor General nor the learned Government Pleader for School Education is present. 4. This is a writ petition filed as early as in the year 1999 and even after ten years, no counter has been filed. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and as no assistance from the side of the respondents and no counter is filed, this Court is of the view that the relief sought for by the petitioner, in this writ petition, can be granted. 5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the respondents are hereby directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Producer on the basis of channel of promotions and rules in force in All India Radio, Doordarshan, Central Institute of Educational Technology and National Council of Educational Research and Training, Government of India. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J Dated June 12, 2009 KSH