P.Srinivas Rao v. The Superintendent Engineer

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION NO.14854 OF 2000 ORDER:

1.

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for fixation of seniority in the cadre of Typist/L.D.C with effect from 3.3.1993 with all consequential benefits.

2.

Heard Sri D.L. Pandu, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri R. Vinod Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for T.S.Transco. 3.

It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as helper on 20.4.1991 and along with him, some other persons such as Mohd. Zahiruddin and T. Sudarshan were also appointed as helpers, and some more helpers such as Bhakthavathsalam and Ravi Kumar Reddy were also appointed three days thereafter, and that the said Bhakthavatsalam and Ravi Kumar Reddy, who are juniors to the petitioner, were converted as L.D.clerks vide proceedings dated 3.3.1993 and the petitioner was converted as typist a year later i.e., on 6.12.1994 and that the grievance of the petitioners is that the juniors to the petitioner were designated as L.D clerks ahead of him even though he possessed requisite qualification for such conversion and therefore, the petitioner prays this Court to convert him as L.D. clerk on par with his juniors. 4.

The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent submits that the so called juniors to the petitioner were degree holders at the time of such conversion whereas the petitioner studied upto intermediate, and when the petitioner acquired the qualification of degree, the case of the petitioner

was also considered and he was converted as typist and therefore, no prejudice has been caused nor the petitioner was discriminated in the matter of conversion to the post of L.D.C/Typist. 5.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that as on today, the petitioner is also working as typist, but however, the pay of the petitioner is very low when compared with his juniors, who were designated as L.D.Cs ahead of him, and in that regard, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent on 3.5.2000 wherein various issues for fixation of his pay and seniority on par with his juniors were raised. But the petitioner has not impleaded his juniors in the present writ petition.

6.

Be that as it may, ends of justice would be met if a direction is given to the respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 3.5.2000. Hence, the respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 3.5.2000. The petitioner is also permitted to submit a fresh representation, within a period of two weeks from today. On such fresh representation being received from the petitioner, the respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

7.

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ (ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J) 14th December, 2017 Nn

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION NO.14854 OF 2000 14.12.2017 Nn

_____________________________ (ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J) November, 2017 cbs/nn

THE HON'BLE Mr. ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI Writ Petition No.30196 of 2017 November, 2017 cbs/nn