S Bheemaiah v. The Principal District Judge,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL WRIT PETITION No.5641 of 2016 Date:25.02.2016 Between:

S.Bheemaiah, S/o Lachaiah ....Petitioner And:

The Principal District Judge, Nalgonda and seven others.

.....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. Kiran Palakurthi Counsel for the Respondents:

The Court made the following:

ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) The petitioner, who joined as Attender, under the Andhra Pradesh Judicial Ministerial services, was promoted as Record Assistant and further promoted as Field Assistant in the month of November, 2011. As his case was not being considered for the post of Senior Assistant, he has filed Writ Petition No.16964 of 2014,

which was closed by this Court by order, 16.9.2014, leaving respondent No.1 free to consider all the candidates in the zone of consideration according to law. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as Senior Assistant by respondent No.1, vide his proceedings No.6165/2014/A1, dated 21.11.2014. Respondent No.1 has issued a draft seniority list of the Senior Assistants in the year 2014 and after considering the objections received from certain candidates including the petitioner, he has finalised the seniority list on 01.7.2015 and based on the said seniority list, he has undertaken the process of promotions to the post of Superintendent. As the petitioner's case was not considered for promotion to the said post, he filed this Writ Petition.

At the hearing, Mr. Kiran Palakurthy, learned counsel for the petitioner, has not disputed that promotions to the posts of Superintendents were effected by respondent No.1 based on the final seniority list, dated 01.7.2015, and that his client has not questioned the same.

In our opinion, respondent No.1 has not committed any irregularity in giving effect to the promotions based on the final seniority list, which remained unchallenged. Having not questioned the validity of the final seniority list in the cadre of Senior Assistants, the petitioner cannot be permitted to raise any grievance against the promotions effected by respondent No.1 based on such final seniority list.

In this view of the matter, we do not find any merit in this Writ Petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.7170 of 2016 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous.

____________________________

JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY ____________________ JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL 25th February, 2016 DR