P.J. Chamundeswari, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P.J. Chamundeswari, D/o P.B.Janaki Ram Naidu, Aged about 50 years, Occ: Junior Assistant (Zilla Parishad Office, Chittoor) R/o D.No.3-402/4, Godugumuru, Greamspet, Chittoor - 500 002.

¶11

...Petitioner^

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velgapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District

¶14

The Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Vijayawada.

¶15

The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Chittoor.

¶16

T Subrahmanyam Reddy, S/o. T. Muni Reddy, Aged about 67 years, Occ Retired Superintendent, Zilla Parishad, Chittoor.

¶17

A Lokanadha Reddy, S/o Not known to the petitioner. Aged about 66years, Occ Retired, Zilla Parishad, Chittoor.

¶18

M V Ramana Prakash, S/o Not known to the petitioner. Aged about 55 years, Occ Administrative Officer, Zilla Parishad,^Chittoor.

¶19

K Vasantha Kumari, S/o Not known to the petitioner. Aged about 58 years, Occ Senior Assistant, Mandal Praja Parishad, Chinnagottigaliu.^

¶20

A

¶21

T M Vijay Kumar Reddy, S/o Not known to the petitioner, Aged about 49 years, Occ: Senior Assistant, EE-PRI-Tirupati.

¶22

R Srinivasan, S/o Not known to the petitioner. Aged about 59 years, Occ M.P.D.O, Yadamari Mandal, Chittoor.

¶23

V R Nagaraja, S/o Not known to the petitioner. Aged about 56 years, Occ: Administrative Officer, O/o. Mandia Praja Parishad Development Officer,

¶24

P Venkata Ramana Prasad, S/o. Not known. Aged about 48 years, Occ; Working as Junior Assistant, Mandal Praja Parishad Office, Penamur, Chittor District.

¶25

...Respondents

¶26

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the impugned endorsement Roc.No.A7/4061/201 9, dated 01.05.2020 issued by the 3rd Respondent rejecting the promotion of the Petitioner as Senior Assistant as illegal, unjust and arbitrary further direct the Respondent No.3 to considering the candidature of the Petitioner for the post of Senior Assistant on par with the juniors who are promoted as Senior Assistants ignoring the Petitioner's candidature for promotion and also direct the 3rd Respondent to place the Petitioner name in the Final Seniority List, dated 09.10.2020 at SI.No.10 and effect the notional promotion in the cadre of Junior Assistant with effect from 2005 and the cadre of Senior Assistant in the year 2008 and Superintendent in the year 2011 with all consequential benefits including seniority and monetary etc., to the Petitioner and further direct the 3rd Respondent to grant promotion notional date of Junior Assistant in the year 2005, Senior Assistant in the year 2008 and Superintendent in the year 2011 with all consequential with seniority, monetary^{etc.^}

¶27

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶28

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the 3rd Respondent to promote the Petitioner for the post of Senior Assistant in the existing vacancies forthwith pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner: SMT. Y MAHA LAKSHMI REPRESENTING SRI K RAMAMOHAN

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ^ RURAL DEV

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 4 to 11: SRI S MAHESH NAIK REPRESENTING SMT. B V APARNA LAKSHMI

¶32

The Court made the following order:

¶33

%

¶34

APHC010278602021

¶35

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3458] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶36

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶37

PRESENT

¶38

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶39

WRIT PETITION NO: 16291/2021

¶40

Between:

¶41

1.P.J. CHAMUNDESWARI,, D/0 RB.JANAKI RAM NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT (ZILLA PARISHAD OFFICE, CHITTOOR), R/0 D.NO.3-402/4, GODUGUMURU, GREAMSPET, CHITTOOR - 500 002.

¶42

...PETITIONER

¶43

AND

¶44

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, RERBY ITS RRINCIRAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶45

THE COMMISSIONER, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIJAYAWADA.

¶46

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PARISHAD, CHITTOOR.

¶47

T SUBRAHMANYAM REDDY, S/0. T. MUNI REDDY, AGED ABOUT⁶⁷ YEARS, OCC RETIRED SUPERINTENDENT, ZILLA PARISHAD, CHITTOOR.

¶48

A LOKANADHA REDDY, S/0 NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 66YEARS, OCC RETIRED, ZILLA PARISHAD, CHITTOOR.

¶49

M V RAMANA PRAKASH, S/0 NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, ZILLA PARISHAD, CHITTOOR.

¶50

K VASANTHA KUMARI, S/0 NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC SENIOR ASSISTANT, MANDAL

¶51

2

¶52

PRAJA PARISHAD, CHINNAGOTTIGALLU.

¶53

T M VIJAY KUMAR REDDY, S/0 NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC SENIOR ASSISTANT, EE-PRITIRUPATI.

¶54

R SRINIVASAN, S/0 NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,^AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC M.PD.O, YADAMARI MANDAL, CHITTOOR.

¶55

10.V R NAGARAJA, S/0 NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, 0/0 MANDLA PRAJA PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,

¶56

P VENKATA RAMANA PRASAD, S/0. NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC WORKING AS JUNIOR ASSISTANT, MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD OFFICE, PENAMUR, CHITTOR DISTRICT.

¶57

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶58

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the impugned endorsement Roc.No.A7/4061/2019, dated 01.05.2020 issued by the 3rd Respondent rejecting the promotion of the Petitioner as Senior Assistant as illegal, unjust and arbitrary further direct the Respondent No.3 to considering . the candidature of the Petitioner for the post of Senior Assistant on par with the juniors who are promoted as Senior Assistants ignoring the Petitioner's candidature for promotion and also direct the 3rd Respondent to place the Petitioner name in the Final Seniority List, dated 09.10.2020 at SI.No.10 and effect the notional promotion in the cadre of Junior Assistant with effect from 2005 and the cadre of Senior Assistant in the year 2008 and Superintendentin the year 2011 with all consequential benefits including seniority and monetary etc., to the Petitioner and further direct the 3rd Respondent to grant promotion notional date of Junior Assistant in the year 2005, Senior Assistant in the year 2008 and Superintendent in the year 2011 with all consequential with seniority, monetary etc., and pass

¶59

lA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶60

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased direct the 3rd Respondent to promote the Petitioner for the post of Senior Assistant in the existing vacancies forthwith pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

¶61

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶62

3

¶63

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant leave to the petitioner/ 3rd respondent^{intheW.P.No.16291} of 2021 to file the counter affidavit in the above writ petition and pass

¶64

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶65

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased please to grant leave to the petitioners to file the reply affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by the Respondent No.3 in W.P.No. 16291 of 2021, before this Hon’ble Court, in the interest of justice and pass

¶66

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶67

1.KRAMAMOHAN

¶68

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶69

GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV

¶70

2.B VAPARNALAKSHMI

¶71

The Court made the following:

¶72

ORDER:-

¶73

Heard the submissions of Smt. Y.Maha Lakshmi, learned^counsel representing Sri K.Ramamohan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the Services - II, Sri S.Mahesh Naik, learned counsel representing Smt. B.V.Aparna Lakshmi, learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents.

¶74

It is contended that the petitioner was appointed as Record Assistant, on 19.02.1990, on compassionate grounds. Her educational qualification as on the date of employment was SSC. As per the existing rules, the qualification for Junior Assistant was Intermediate. It is contended that her juniors who were appointed as attenders, were promoted as

¶75

4

¶76

Record Assistants, Record Assistants to Junior Assistants and Senior Assistants. The petitioner has acquired her Degree qualification in 2005.

¶77

In the seniority list of Record Assistants, the petitioner was placed at SI.No.67 and the unofficial respondents who were juniors in the seniority list, were promoted as Junior Assistants much earlier. Vide the impugned endorsement, it was informed that the promotion requires educational qualification of Intermediate, she was promoted as Junior Assistant in 2008, after she had met with the required educational qualification and her seniority for Junior Assistant was placed at SI.No.116. Challenging the same, the instant writ petition is filed.

¶78

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per G.O.Ms.No.261, GAD, dated 14.07.1998, that prescribes the education qualification for the post of Junior Assistant is not applicable to those persons who were appointed prior to the said G.O. Therefore, the petitioner’s further case is that she has got educational qualification in Bachelor's Degree through Open University examinations conducted in 2005. It is further contended that the unofficial respondents are promoted as Junior Assistants much prior to the petitioner.

¶79

The respondents filed a counter affidavit stating that^theminimum requisite qualification for the post of Junior Assistant is intermediate. The petitioner did not possess the said qualification as on the date of her initial appointment as a Record Assistant. Whereas, the other employees whose names the petitioner has referred to, saying that they have got promotion

¶80

5

¶81

much earlier than the petitioner, despite they being juniors to her, have intermediate qualification either by the date of joining the service as Watchman/Attender, or, however, much prior to the petitioner acquired the required qualification. It is further stated that the petitioner did not acquire an Intermediate Qualification but acquired a Degree Qualification in 2005 from the Qpen University. Thus, contended that the impugned^{endorsementhas} rightly been issued. Further stated that the employees i.e.. Sri T.Subramanyam Reddy and 6 others were promoted with the qualification of SSC pass is not true. The above persons have passed minimum qualification of Intermediate for promotion as Junior Assistant. The seniority list was prepared as per the qualifications of the individuals who acquired minimum qualification of the Intermediate passed and given promotion and that there has been no violation of prevailing rule position.

¶82

Considered the submissions. The respondent in the impugned endorsement has categorically stated the reasons. The petitioner was promoted as Junior Assistant in 2008, since she had acquired a higher educational qualification of a Bachelor’s Degree (Qpen University) in 2005, without qualifying for intermediate. The petitioner’s acquisition of a higher qualification after SSC was in 2005. Sri T.Subramanyam Reddy was appointed in the year 1978 and promoted to the Post of Attender in 1983, and as Junior Assistant on 11.02.1994. At this juncture, it is useful to refer to the provisions of G.Q.Ms.No.261, GAD, dated 14.07.1998,^{whichareasfollows:}

¶83

6

¶84

“(1) No person shall be eligible for appointment to the categories specified in column (1) of Annexure-I to these rules by the method specified in column (2) thereof, unless he possesses the qualifications specified in the corresponding entry in column (3)^thereof

¶85

(2) No person shall be eligible for appointment to any post in the service either by direct recruitment or by appointment by transfer or by promotion, including conversion, unless be possesses^{theIntermediate} qualification and where a higher educational qualification is prescribed for such post, such higher qualification.

¶86

Provided that those who were already appointed in the^Officesof HOD and Directorates in prior to Decembe,r 1984 and those appointed in Offices other than the Heads of Departments and Directorates prior to 29.10.1987 shall be eligible for appointment as Junior Assistant etc., if they passed S.S.C., or any equivalent^{examination.”} The contention of the petitioner is that G.O.Ms.No.261, GAD, dated 14.07.1998 is not applicable to the case of the petitioner, is misconceived since law as on the date of consideration of the case for promotion is to be considered not the law as on the date of initial appointment to the service, in the light of the reasons stated in the impugned endorsement and the counter affidavit, I do not see any discrimination^{thathasbeenmeted} out to the petitioner while granting promotion in 2008^{asJuniorAssistant.}

¶87