K. Madhava Rao v. Government Of Andhra Pradesh

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1375 OF 2009 ORDER :

This writ petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the diploma and graduate engineers in the ratio 1 : 1 for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer and considering only graduate Dy. Executive Engineers, including respondents 3 to 8 as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to declare the petitioners are entitled to be considered for promotion as Executive Engineers. 2.

It is the case of the petitioners that they are Diploma Engineers and were appointed as Assistant Engineers in the 2nd respondent Corporation in the year 1983 and they were also promoted as Dy. Executive Engineers. While so, the Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.144, Finance (SMPC) Department dated 03.06.2008, where under 2080 additional posts in various categories were created in A.P. State Housing Corporation Ltd., for implementation of INDIRAMMA Housing programme. Out of 2080 additional posts, 81 posts were created in the category of Executive Engineers. The Government has also approved the service Rules of the 2nd respondent Corporation vide G.O.Ms.No.33 Housing (RH) dated 16.05.1998. That further promotions from the category of Dy.Executive Engineer shall be made in the ratio of 1 : 1 between Diploma and Degree Holders. However, the 2nd respondent Corporation without following the said ratio, has sent the names of unofficial respondents i.e.,

graduate Executive Engineers only, because earlier more number of diploma engineers were promoted as Executive Engineers than the graduate engineers. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not considering the cases of only graduate engineers for promotion and not considering the petitioners and other eligible diploma engineers, the present writ petition is filed. 3.

Counter affidavit is filed by the 2nd respondent denying the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition stating that the Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.144, Finance (SMPC) Department dated 03.06.2008 in which 2080 posts sanctioned in various categories in Indiramma Housing programme wherein 81 posts were created in the category of Executive Engineers. The Government has also instructed to fill up the posts by following APSHCL Service Rules issued in G.O.Ms.No.33, dated 15.05.1998. It is stated that the eligibility for promotion to the post of Executive Engineers is as follows: i) By promotion from the category i.e., Dy.EEs and ADTP ii) Promotion from Dy.EEs between the Degree and diploma holders shall be in the ratio of 1:1 iii) If sufficient number of qualified candidate are not available at a given time to fill up the vacancies a maximum relaxation in service of one year in respect of degree holders and two years in respect of diploma holders shall be considered.

iv) If candidates are not available in any category the vacancy shall be filled by qualified candidates from other category. 4.

It is stated that at the time of sending Departmental Promotion Committee notes to Government 72 Executive Engineers were working in the Corporation and 4 officers in the rank of Executive Engineers are working in other departments on

deputation basis totaling to 76. Out of the 76 Executive Engineers, 28 Executive Engineers are degree holders and 48 Executive Engineers are diploma holders. At present only the decree qualified candidates would become eligible for filling up the vacancies of Executive Engineers as per the service rules of the Corporation, as such, sought for dismissal of the writ petition.

5.

Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation has categorically explained that the diploma holders were appointed in excess of their quota and that in order to meet the ratio 1:1 only graduate engineers were called for. 6.

A perusal of the material available on record shows that that out of 76 Executive Engineers, 28 Executive Engineers are degree holders and 48 Executive Engineers are diploma holders, as such, only graduate engineers names are called for resultant vacancies of Executive Engineers as per the service Rules of the Corporation. The said aspect was not disputed by the petitioners by way of filing any reply and no illegality or infirmity is brought to my notice in the action of the 2nd respondent Corporation in calling the graduate engineers for filling up of the posts of Executive Engineers. In fact, it appears from the counter that in order to meet the ratio 1:1, the said decision was taken, as such, the same cannot be faulted.

In view of above facts and circumstances, I do not see any merit in the writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand dismissed. ____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 05.01.2017 kvs

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1375 of 2009 Date: 05.01.2017 kvs