G. China Satyanarayana, v. The Depot Manager,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH ***** Writ Petition No.23254 of 2015 Between G.China Satyanarayana ... Petitioner and The Depot Manager, Razole, APSRTC, Razole, and 2 others ... Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 28-7-2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment?

Yes/No Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reports/Journals Yes/No Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

Yes/No HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.23254 of 2015 Order:

Heard Sri T.S. Venkata Ramana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri S.V. Ramana, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-APSRTC.

2. The petitioner was appointed as an Attender on

01-4-1993 on contract basis. As his services were not regularised, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No.10677 of 1996 in this Court seeking regularisation and the same was allowed and against the said order, the respondents filed Writ Appeal No.584 of 2003 which was dismissed. However, while the writ appeal is pending, the services of the petitioner have been regularised with effect from 23-01-2003. While the petitioner was working in Razole Depot as Attender, the respondents 1 and 2 called for the records for filling up of the vacancies of Record Tracers from among the eligible employees. Subsequently, Willingness Letters dated 27-01-2012 were taken from the eligible employees. Basing on the service record and opinion expressed by the Depot Managers, 8 employees were considered for promotion to the post of Record Tracer.

However, only 5 employees were promoted as Record Tracers in the year 2013 even though there are 10 vacancies. Therefore, according to the petitioner, there are vacancies in the promotion post of Record Tracer and the petitioner is entitled to be promoted as Record Tracer. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 28-4-2013 and also gave Willingness Letter to be promoted as Record Tracer as he was found eligible for the post of Record Tracer. Subsequently, he submitted another representation dated 29-11-2014 requesting the respondents to consider his case for promotion but no action was taken on the representations of the petitioner.

3. In view of the aforementioned facts, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents-Corporation to consider the representations dated 28-4-2013 and 29-11-2014 whereunder the petitioner sought for promotion as Record Tracer and pass appropriate orders within a period of 8 (eight) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If necessary, the petitioner may make a fresh representation to the respondents for passing appropriate orders and the same shall be considered by the respondents. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No costs. ___________________ R.KANTHA RAO, J.

28th July, 2015.

Ak HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO Writ Petition No.23254 of 2015

28th July, 2015.

(Ak)