IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20376 of 2006 Between: L.Srinivasa Murthy, s/o Siva Ramakrishnaiah, Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple Post & Mandal Pedakakani, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1The Commissioner, Endowments Department, Tilak Road, Hyderabad. 2The Assistant Commissioner & Executive Officer, Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple, Post & Mandal, pedakakani, Guntur District. 3Sri P. Srinivas Rao Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple, Post & Mandal Pedakakani, Guntur district. 4Sri S. Srinivasa Rao Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple, Post & Mandal Pedakakani, Guntur district. 5Smt. ILV Sailaja Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple, Post & Mandal Pedakakani, Guntur district. 6Srinivasa Reddy Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple, Post & Mandal Pedakakani, Guntur district. 7Smt. Nirmala Rani Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple, Post & Mandal Pedakakani, Guntur district. 8V.V. Ratnaiah Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple, Post & Mandal Pedakakani, Guntur district. 9Y. Yagna Narayana Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple, Post & Mandal Pedakakani, Guntur 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 writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant in the existing vacancy as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as Junior Assistant on par with his juniors with all consequential beneﬁts in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri R.M.RATNA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as Sweeper-cum- Choultries Watchman by Sri Malleshwara Swamy Temple, Pedakakani Village and Mandal, Guntur District, vide orders, dated 01.08.1989. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Record Assistant against an existing vacancy on 11.05.2005, but was reverted shortly thereafter. The petitioner contends that his case is not being considered for the post of Record Assistant or Junior Assistant, by treating him as junior to several persons, who are appointed subsequent to him, as N.M.Rs. The writ petition came up for hearing on an earlier occasion and when it was found that the petitioner did not implead the persons against whom he claimed seniority, the matter was adjourned to enable him to take necessary steps. Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application to implead the additional parties, who, in turn, were made parties as respondents 3 to 9. On behalf of the ﬁrst respondent, it is pleaded that the petitioner did not hold the requisite qualiﬁcations for being promoted to the post of Record Assistant or Junior Assistant and in that view of the matter, no relief can be granted to him. Reliance is placed upon the rules framed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.888, dated 08.12.2000. The second respondent ﬁled a counter-aﬃdavit stating inter alia that though the petitioner was appointed earlier in point of time, he was not entitled to be promoted to higher post, since he did not hold requisite qualiﬁcations. Reference is made to diﬀerent orders issued by the Government from time to time, including those placing restriction upon regular appointment of the persons as well as prescribing the qualifications for the same. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Endowments, the learned Standing Counsel for the second respondent and the learned counsel for respondents 3 to 9. There is no dispute that the petitioner was appointed on regular basis, through orders, dated 01.08.1999, as Sweeper-cum-Choultries Watchman in the second respondent temple. It is also a matter of record that respondents 3 to 9 were engaged as N.M.Rs in various capacities through subsequent orders. On the basis of the permission accorded by the competent authority, the second respondent proceeded to make appointments to the post of Record Assistant or Junior Assistant. The actual cadre strength and the dates, on which the appointments against each of the categories were made, are not immediately before this Court. The fact, however, remains that the petitioner was promoted as Record Assistant as late as in the year 2005, but was reverted shortly thereafter due to lack of vacancy. If an occasion arose for the second respondent to make fresh appointments or promotions against the sanctioned posts, it was fundamental that the cases of the existing employees in the lower cadres ought to have been considered. The N.M.Rs., if at all, were entitled to be considered for the left over vacancies, or against the vacancies that arise on account of promotion of the regular employees; but a totally diﬀerent and defective procedure was followed. The case of the petitioner, who was the regular employee, was ignored and appointment to the post of Record Assistant and Junior Assistant was made from out of the candidates, who were engaged as N.M.Rs. The eligibility of the petitioner ought to have been determined with reference to the Rules that were in force as on the date on which the appointments were made for the ﬁrst time. Respondents 1 and 2 cannot be permitted to defeat the claim of the petitioner on the basis of the rules that came into force subsequently. The very fact that as late as in the year 2005, the petitioner was found eligible to be promoted as Record Assistant discloses that he was eligible for that post on an earlier occasion also. It is a diﬀerent thing as to whether the petitioner holds qualiﬁcation for the post of Junior Assistant. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that (a) the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Record Assistant shall be considered in preference to any employee, engaged on N.M.R. basis or otherwise subsequent to the petitioner; with eﬀect from the date on which his junior was promoted and the ﬁnancial beneﬁts shall be extended from the date of the actual promotion; (b) the eligibility of the petitioner for the post of Junior Assistant shall be examined with reference to the rules which are in force as on today, and (c) this exercise shall be completed, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:18.08.2008 kdl