K.Vijaya Kumar, v. The Commissioner Of Collegiate Education,

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO W.P.No.25540 of 2016 ORDER:

1.

The petitioner was appointed as junior lecturer during the year 1984 and worked up to 06.10.1987. Thereafter, he appeared for selection to the post of lecturer in Degree College in pursuance of notification issued by the A.P.P.S.C. and got selected for the said post. Accordingly, he was appointed as junior lecturer in Physics in Zone-II. He joined the said post on 07.10.1987. His services were regularized with effect from 01.10.1987. Later on, he was transferred from Zone-II to Zone-IV and posted in Government Degree College for Women, Srikalahasthi, Chittoor District, by protecting his seniority. He retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation while working in the said post on 31.03.2014. The present writ petition is filed seeking compensation of Rs.

50,00,000/- for the mental agony and financial loss suffered by the petitioner in the hands of the respondents in not considering his claim for promotion to the post of Principal. He states that his case was not considered in spite of a direction by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.8841 of 2011 dated 02.08.2013 and his further representation dated 19.08.2013. 2.

It is clear that the petitioner was working in a Government Degree College and the present writ petition is not maintainable before this Court in relation to any claim connected with his service. This writ petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.

However, when this Court pointed out to the learned Counsel for the petitioner as to how the compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- can be allowed for denial of promotion, he produced before this Court a copy of the order in S.R.Bhanrale V. Union of India1 and submitted that in the said case Rs.2,00,000/- compensation was awarded to the appellant therein in view of the delay in payment of retiral benefits. In the present case, the grievance of the petitioner does not relate to payment of retiral benefits, but denial of promotion prior to his retirement. When the order dated 02.08.2013 in O.A.No.8841 of 2011 was not complied with, the petitioner should have taken appropriate proceedings and this Court cannot entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for payment of compensation for denial of promotion of a particular period for not implementing the order of the Tribunal. In the circumstances, this Court sees no ground to admit the present writ petition.

.3.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

______________________________ A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J 21-09-2016 Gsn 1 AIR 1997 (SC) 27