T.Laxman Goud v. The Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.26440 of 2018 ORDER: (ORAL) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue raised in the writ petition is ceased by the Supreme Court which fact is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader for Services appearing on behalf of the respondents.

The learned Government Pleader for Services has drawn our attention to the order dated 25.04.2018 in Conmt. Petition (C) No.820 of 2017 passed by the Supreme Court whereby the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission was directed to revise the seniority list in respect of all the vacancies available and arising from 07.03.2002. Consequently, the respondents revised the list and submitted the same before the Supreme Court.

The case of the petitioner is that when the aforementioned direction was given by the Supreme Court, the respondents were supposed to seek objections, however no objections have been sought, as such, the petitioner is apprehending that the respondents may disturb his seniority. Subsequently, the Supreme Court, vide its order dated 15.05.2018 in Conmt. Petition (C) No.820 of 2017, while ordering notices in all fresh applications, gave liberty to the parties to file their objections before the next date of hearing i.e. 19.07.2018. It appears, petitioner herein has not filed his objection.

SKK, J & AKS, J W.P.No.26440 of 2018 The learned Government Pleader for Services submits that the petitioner is at liberty to file his objections, if any, as per the order of the Supreme Court, and on such objections being filed, the respondents will consider the objections and apprise the same to the Supreme Court in this regard.

In view of the factual situation, we are inclined to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to retain and continue the petitioner in his post.

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

It is needless to mention that this order will be subject to the outcome of the issue pending before the Supreme Court. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

_______________________ SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J _____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J July 31, 2018 MRR