IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 22797 of 2006 Between: M. Sitaramaiah, S/o. Kotaiah, Zilla Parishad High School, Kunkalamarru, Karamchedu Mandal, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Secretary, Education Department,Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner & Director of/ School Education, Govt. of A.P. Saifabad, Hyderabad. 3 The District Educational Officer, Ongole, Prakasam District. 4 The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Ongole, Prakasam District. 5 The Assist Audit Officer, State Audit (ZP), Ongole, Prakasam District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 to issue a Writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order dated 20-8-2006 made in OA No. 6706 of 2003 and pass such order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.SURENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 and 5: Mr.M.Prabhakar Rao The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Assailing the orders dated 20.08.2006 passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in O.A. No. 6076 of 2003, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The petitioner was initially appointed as Record Assistant in the Government High School, Tanguturu, Prakasam District, in the year 1970, and subsequently, he was promoted as Junior Assistant on 12.06.1981. While he was in service, he passed Sahitya Ratna and Siksha Visarada Training, which is equivalent to M.A., during the year 1984 and he also passed B.Ed. in the year 1994. Thus, he is fully qualified and eligible for appointment/transfer to the post of Grade-I Hindi Pandit. Based on the said qualifications and eligibility, the 3rd respondent, namely the District Educational Officer had issued proceedings dated 15.01.2001 promoting the petitioner by transfer to the post of Grade-I Hindi Pandit and posted him to Z.P. High School, Kunkalamarru of Kusumanchi Mandal. Pursuant to the said proceedings, the petitioner joined duty on 21.01.2001 and working as such since then. Subsequently, the 3rd respondent issued proceedings dated 27.06.2001 fixing his pay in the cadre of Grade-I Hindi Pandit, and the same was forwarded to the Audit, but the Audit took objection on the ground that the petitioner is not entitled for appointment by transfer to the post of Grade-I Hindi Pandit as per G.O. Ms. No. 538. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Tribunal and filed O.A. No. 6076 of 2003, which was dismissed by reason of the order impugned herein. Against the said order, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appointment of the petitioner to the category of Hindi Pandit Gr.I is perfectly legal and in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.538, dated 20.11.1998. He further submits that though the petitioner is fully eligible and qualified for the post of Grade-I Hindi Pandit by recruitment by transfer under the quota meant for non-teaching staff, the action of the respondents in not considering his case under the guise of audit objection that there is no such provision in G.O. Ms. No. 538 and not paying salaries to him, is illegal and arbitrary. He further submits that the Tribunal without properly appreciating the same, has come to a wrong conclusion that the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Hindi Pandit Grade-I is not in consonance with the Special Rules, contained in G.O. Ms. No. 538, dated 20.11.1998. He, thus, prays to allow the writ petition and set aside the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Education submits that as per G.O. Ms. No. 538, dated 20.11.1998 there is no provision for a Junior Assistant to get promotion as Hindi Pandit Gr.I. He further submits that Note 7 of the Service Rules, contained in G.O.Ms.No.538, dated 20.11.1998, relied upon by the petitioner, is not at all applicable to the post of Hindi Pandit Grade-I and it restricts only for appointment as well as for promoting the candidates to the post of Hindi Pandit Grade-I until and unless the relevant service rules permit them accordingly and therefore, the claim of the petitioner pay was rightly rejected on the ground that he has not been appointed in accordance with the Rules. He further submits that the Tribunal below, after appreciating the entire material, has rightly dismissed the O.A filed by the petitioner and no reasons to interfere with the same. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the material on record. We have perused the impugned order passed by the Tribunal below as well as the Service Rules contained in G.O.Ms.No.538 dated 20.11.1998. The method of appointment to the post of Language Pandit Grade-I is prescribed in Rule 3. Nowhere in the G.O. in question, it is stated that the cadre which has been held by the petitioner prior to his promotion will come in the purview of the feeder category and that there is a privilege for the junior assistants who possessed requisite qualification to be a Hindi Pandit by way of promotion/transfer. In these circumstances, we have no hesitation to hold that the appointment of the petitioner from the category of Junior Assistant to the post of Hindi Pandit Gr.I is totally contrary to the Rules. The Tribunal below is justified in holding that the appointment of the petitioner to the post of Hindi Pandit Grade-I, is not in consonance with the Special Rules contained in G.O.Ms.No.538, dated 20.11.1998, which were governing the situation at the relevant point of time. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the finding given by the Tribunal below. Hence, the writ petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate authorities for payment of salary, as per rules. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________​ T. MEENA KUMARI, J. _______________ G.CHANDRAIAH, J. Date:18-03-2008. ccm To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{RLD}