K. Srinivas, v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.2569 of 2019 ORDER :

This writ petition is filed seeking Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer under SC category even though the petitioner is fully eligible for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer as per the whims and fancies by ignoring the seniority list as per the provisional seniority list of Deputy Range Officers of Zone-V i.e., Adilabad, Khammam and Warangal Circle as on 01.01.2018 vide Rc.No.111/2019/M2, dated 24.01.2019 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently sought a direction to the respondents to grant promotion to the petitioner as Forest Range Officer without reference to the departmental proceedings.

Heard Sri K. Lakshmi Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Services. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though the petitioner is working as Deputy Range Officer and fully eligible and qualified for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer, the respondents are not considering his case for promotion to the said post on the ground of pendency of Charge Memo vide Rc.No.111/2019/M2, dated 27.06.2015 against him.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the State Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999, wherein the State Government formulated certain guidelines in respect of the employees against whom disciplinary proceedings or criminal proceedings are pending and their suitability for the next promotional avenues and as per the said G.O., the competent authority must consider the cases of the employees against whom disciplinary proceedings are pending and pass orders as to whether the charges levelled against the said employees are involving moral turpitude or misappropriation of funds and whether they are fit for next promotion, inspite of pendency of disciplinary proceedings against them.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in the instant case, the appointing authority has not examined the case of the petitioner in terms of the guidelines formulated in G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999 and mechanically not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer. Therefore, the learned counsel contends that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to examine the case of the petitioner in terms of the guidelines formulated in G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999 and pass appropriate orders.

On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for Services contends that the case of the petitioner will be

considered and appropriate orders would be passed in terms of the guidelines formulated in G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999. This Court, having considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer strictly in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, dated 10.06.1999 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this writ petition shall stand closed.

______________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI 14.02.2019.

Msr

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.2569 of 2019 14.02.2019 Msr