THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 472 of 2002 Date: 06th June, 2011 Between: V. Dileep Kumar … Petitioner And The Vice-Chancellor, University of Hyderabad and 4 others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No. 472 of 2002 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to promote the petitioner as per the Seniority List under Scheduled Caste quota, with all the consequential benefits, duly setting aside the Promotion Order No.UH/P.11/B.6/2001/1203 dated 10.12.2001 issued by the 2nd respondent promoting the 5th respondent, declaring the same as arbitrary, illegal, unwarranted and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The case of the petitioner is that he is qualified in B.A. degree in 1985 (with History, Economics, and Political Science) from Andhra University and M.A (History) degree in 1989 from respondent- University of Hyderabad. He was appointed as Technical Assistant in the Department of History in the respondent-University as direct recruitee on 20.12.1990. Thereafter his name was shown at S.No.3 in the Staff List under the category of Technical Assistants along with other Technical Assistants ever since he joined the respondent- University. He belongs to Scheduled Caste community. The Technical Assistants in the Labs and History department is one class of employees as categorized by the respondent-University. The Staff List is also used as Seniority List for the purpose of consideration for promotion by DPC in the respondent-University. His further case is that one Mrs.P.Manikya Margaret (the 5th respondent herein) joined respondent-University on 01.09.1994, subsequent to his joining respondent-University, and her seniority is shown at Serial No.8 in the said Staff/Seniority list and she also belongs to Scheduled Caste community. The petitioner submits that the respondent-University has notified a promotion policy for Lab Staff vide notification No.UH/Estt/11/87/3156 dated 04.11.1987 according to which the hierarchy of the technical staff is as follows: (i) Senior Technical Assistant (ii) Technical Assistant (iii) Senior Laboratory Assistant (iv) Junior Laboratory Assistant (v) Laboratory Attendant Thereafter, the respondent-University notified the revised promotion policy for Lab Staff vide Proceedings dated 04.01.1992, bringing the policy into effect with retrospective date i.e., from 06.12.1991. According to the revised promotion policy, the position is as under: (i) Instrumentation Officer/Technical Officer/Scientific Officer (ii) Senior Technical Assistant (iii) Technical Assistant (iv) Senior Lab Assistant (v) Junior Lab Assistant (vi) Laboratory Attendant His further case is that, even after the publication of revised promotion policy for Lab Staff, the respondent-University continued to appoint/promote non-science graduates to the post of Senior Lab Assistant, even though the Recruitment Rules prescribe Degree/Diploma in Science. The respondent-University has been flouting the promotion policy and promoted one V. Mallaiah Setty to the post of Senior Technical Assistant from the post of Technical Assistant with irrelevant BOL qualification. The respondent-University considered filling of some vacancies of Senior Technical Assistants under seniority-cum-fitness against Scheduled Caste quota in the month of November/December 2001 and promoted his junior Mrs.P.Manikya Margaret (5th respondent) who was standing at Serial No.8 in the seniority list ignoring the petitioner’s seniority. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation on 24.10.2001, bringing to the notice of the 1st respondent, the injustice done to him. As no action was taken on that representation, he was constrained to make another representation dated 13.12.2001 and 19.12.2001 to the 1st respondent. However, no action was taken. This Court, while admitting the Writ Petition on 17.06.2002, ordered rule nisi. No counter has been filed by the respondent. Further on 18.08.2010, the learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice by RPAD and file proof of service; in default, the writ petition stand dismissed as against respondent Nos. 3 to 5 without further reference to the Court. In the writ petition, the promotion of 5th respondent to the post of Senior Technical Assistant was challenged. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is senior to that of the 5th respondent. The petitioner’s Serial No. is at 3 where as 5th respondent’s Serial No. is at 8. The petitioner was appointed in the year 1990 whereas the 5th respondent was appointed in the year 1994. As per the promotion policy, the Senior Technical Assistant is promotion post from the post of Technical Assistant; and the promotion is based on the principle of seniority-cum-merit. The case of the petitioner is that though the 5th respondent is junior to that of the petitioner, overlooking the seniority, the 1st respondent has considered the case of the 5th respondent for promotion to the post of Senior Technical Assistant from the post of Technical Assistant in the impugned proceedings. Therefore, it was said to be in violation of Articles 14 to 16 of the Constitution of India. No counter has been filed on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2; and the writ petition is due to be dismissed as against Respondents 3 to 5. Therefore, non-filing of counter by the respondents 3 to 5 does not have any affect on the claim of the petitioner. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner that the 5th respondent has to come under impugned proceedings is illegal. The petitioner claims to have made representations dated 24.10.2001, 13.12.2001 and 19.12.2001. Since the respondent has not taken any action on the said representations, he was constrained to file this Writ Petition. Therefore, in the circumstances, going into the merits of the case, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to consider the representations dated 24.10.2001, 13.12.2001 and 19.12.2001 stated to have been filed by the petitioner questioning the promotion of the 5th respondent to the post of Senior Technical Assistant from the post of Technical Assistant, and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petition is accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH 06th June, 2011 KSM