Dismissed¶62

B.Sridhar v. The Power Generation Corporation Ltd.

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Mar 2025WP/7602/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

APGENCO; Sub Engineer / Junior Engineer promotion by transfer; zonal-wise promotion (Zone-1 vs Zone-ll); qualified select list; parity with depute from Zone-ll rejected; no vacancy in Zone-1 Mechanical stream; Diploma in Mechanical Engineering; sealed-cover interim orders in W.P.Nos. 11991/2018 and 38028/2018; W.P.No.28979 of 2019 interim direction dated 26.09.2018; Memo CGM(Adm) IS and ERP) IS(Adm)/AS(Adm)/PO-A/57/2016 dated 29-6-2016; G.O.O. No. 400/JS(per)/2014 dated 26-11-2014; Articles 14, 16 and 226; Section 151 CPC; writ petition dismissed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

The Court recorded, as admitted, that the petitioner possesses the requisite qualification for promotion as Sub Engineer, namely a Diploma in Mechanical Engineering, and that the petitioner belongs to Zone-1. ¶57

B.Sridhar Vs The Power Generation… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶62

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents' failure to consider the petitioner's claim for promotion/appointment by transfer as Sub Engineer/Junior Engineer on the strength of the qualified select list, while considering other similarly situated persons whose names are included in that list, was arbitrary, illegal, unjust and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. +1 more

¶49

Court's answer

¶57

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's contention that his case has to be considered on par with D. Nageswara Rao cannot be accepted: the petitioner belongs to the Mechanical Engineering Department (Zone-1), whereas Nageswara Rao belongs to the Electrical Engineering Department (Zone-ll) and was deputed to Zone-1; it was not the petitioner's case that Nageswara Rao's post was allotted in Zone-1.

¶61

Key takeaways

Promotion to the post of Sub-Engineer is zonal-wise; the petitioner, who falls in Zone-1, is seeking promotion in Zone-ll, and as there is no vacancy for the said post in Zone-1 (Mechanical stream), the case of the petitioner cannot be considered.ratio¶62
There is no merit in the contentions raised by the petitioner and, accordingly, the petition deserves dismissal.ratio¶62

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati (Dr. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa), 05-03-2025: B. Sridhar, Foreman Grade-IV (stated in the body of the order to be working as Junior Engineer) of APGENCO, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing his promotion/appointment by transfer as Sub Engineer/Junior Engineer on the strength of the qualified select list, in terms of Memo No. CGM(Adm) IS and ERP) IS(Adm)/AS(Adm)/PO-A/57/2016 dated 29-6-2016 read with G.O.O. No. 400/JS(per)/2014 dated 26-11-2014, alleging discrimination vis-a-vis other selected candidates contrary to Articles 14 and 16. Held, dismissing the petition: (i) promotion to Sub-Engineer is zonal-wise; the petitioner belongs to Zone-1 and sought promotion in Zone-ll; (ii) his parity plea with D. Nageswara Rao fails, as Nageswara Rao belongs to the Electrical stream (Zone-ll) and was deputed to Zone-1, and there was no vacancy in Zone-1 for the Mechanical stream; (iii) possession of the requisite Diploma in Mechanical Engineering was undisputed. No order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE

¶5

HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶6

WRIT PFTITIQN NO: 7602 OF 2019

¶7

Between:

¶8

B.Sridhar, S/o Rangamnaidu, Aged about 46 years, Foreman IV, upper selair, . Visakhapatnam now working at Dr.N.T.T.P.S. Vijayawada, Krishna District

¶9

...Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

The Power Generation Corporation Ltd.,. Rep. by its^Chairmanand Managing Director, Vidyut Soudha, Vijayawada.

¶12

The Chief General Manager (Adm. IS and ERP) A.P. Power Generation Corporation Ltd., Vidyut Soudha, Vijayawada.

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

226 of the Constitution of India praying that in Petition under Article the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{theHighCourtmay} direction more particularly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or the action of the one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the claim of the petitioner for promotion to respondents in not considering the strength of the qualified the post of Sub Engineer/Junior Engineer on the other similarly situated persons whose select list while considering names are included in the qualified select list without any valid and legal in violation of Articles 14 justification as being arbitrary, illegal, unjust and

¶15

¶16

and 16 of the Constitution of India and further be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for appointment by transfer as Sub Engineer on the strength of qualified select list strictly adhering the qualifications prescribed in terms of Memo No. CGM(Adm) IS and ERP) IS(Adm)/AS(Adm)/PO-A/57/2016 dated 29-6-2016 issued by the 2nd respondent read with G.O.O. No. 400/JS(per)/2014^{dated26-11-2014.}

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶18

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 to direct the Respondents to reconsider the- claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Sub Engineer/Junior Engineer by the method of appointment by transfer on the strength of qualified^select list notified strictly adhering the qualification prescribed in terms of Memo No. CGM(Adm) IS &ERP) IS(Adm)/AS(Adm)/P0- A/57/2016 dated 29-6-2016 issued by the 2nd respondent read with G.O.O. No. 400/JS(per)/20¹⁴ dated 26-11-2014.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶20

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 to direct the Respondent No. 2 not discriminate me from other similar cases decided earlier in affecting promotion to Junior Engineer (Sub Engineer) and to affect my promotion from 30-05-2019 by modifying the promotion orders passed on 19-122022, vide Memo No. CGM (ADM,IS&ERP) /GM(HR-ADM) /EE(ADM) /DY.EE(A-ll)/D.No. 557/22, with retrospective pecuniary benefits and reckon the seniority^from the back date of 30-05-2019.

¶21

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. D LINGA RAO

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: NAGARAJU NAGURU, STANDING COUNSEL FOR APGENCO

¶24

The Court made the following order:

¶25

APHC010176502019

¶26

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶27

[3396]

¶28

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶29

WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH

¶30

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶31

PRESENT

¶32

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶33

WRIT PETITION NO: 7602/2019

¶34

Between:

¶35

1.B.SRIDHAR, S/0 RANGAMNAIDU, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, FOREMAN IV, UPPER SELAIR, VISAKHAPATNAM NOW WORKING AT DR.N.T.T.P.S. VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT

¶36

...PETITIONER

¶37

¶38

1.THE POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, VIDYUT SOUDHA, VIJAYAWADA.

¶39

2.THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER ADM IS AND ERP A P POWER GENERATION CORPORATION LTD, VIDYUT SOUDHA, VIJAYAWADA.

¶40

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶41

Counsel for the Petitioner;

¶42

1.D LINGA RAO

¶43

Counsel for the Respondent(S);

¶44

1.NAGARAJU NAGURU, STANDING COUNSEL FOR APGENCO

¶45

The Court made the following:

¶46

ORDER:

¶47

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution^ofIndiawith

¶48

the following prayer for:

¶49

“.... a writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in not considering the claim of the Petitioner for promotion^tothepostof Sub Engineer/Junior Engineer on the strength of the^{qualifiedselect} list while considering the other similarly situated persons whose names are included in the qualified select list without any^valid and legal justification as being arbitrary, illegal, unjust^{andinviolationof} Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and further be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the claim of^{thepetitionerfor} appointment by transfer as Sub^ngineer on the strength^ofqualified

¶50

¶51

¶52

select list strictly adhering the qualifications prescribed^intermsof Memo No. CGM(Adm) IS and ERR) IS(Adm)/AS(Adm)/PO-A/57/2016 dated 29-6-2016 issued by the 2"^ Respondent read with^G.0.0.No. 400/JS(per)/2014 dated 26-11-2014.”

¶53

and Sri 2. Heard Sri D.Linga Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioner Nagaraju Naguru, learned Standing Counsel for Respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that^{thePetitionerhas} been working as Foreman Grade-lV in the Operations^{andMaintenanceunit} under the administrative control of Respondents. Learned counsel would further submit that the Petitioner possessed Diploma in Mechanical Engineering. It is submitted that in view of the Orders^{inG.O.O.No.8,dated} 11.01.2018, issued by Respondent-Corporation, having^{regardtotheeligibility} and qualification of the Petitioner, he along with^{otherswereissuedhalltickets} for the written examination to the post of Sub Engineer by^transfer. However, the written examination was postponed. Learned counsel^{wouldsubmitthat,} challenging the postponement of examination, the Petitioner^{hereinalongwith} others filed another writ petition. In view of the^{interimdirectiontherein,the} written examination was conducted and qualified select list was published denying the promotion to the Petitioner without any^validreason. 4. Learned Standing Counsel for Respondent would submit that, the Petitioner falls in Zone-l as such, his request for promotion in Zone-ll cannot be considered. It is further submitted that, there is no vacancy in Zone-l for the said post. Learned Standing Counsel would submit^{thatthePetitionerfalls} in Zone-l and he seeks his promotion in Zone-ll, which is not permissible.

/■

Learned Standing Counsel finally submits that, viewed^{fromanyangle,there} are no circumstances warranting interference of this^Court. 5. Considering the submissions made and a fair look at the material placed on record, admittedly, the Petitioner has been^working as Junior Engineer in Respondent-Corporation. There is no dispute about the possession of requisite qualification by the Petitioner^{forbeingpromotedas} Sub Engineer as he possessed the qualification of Diploma in Mechanical Engineering and the Petitioner belongs to Zone-1. 6. Admittedly, the Petitioner along with others was^issued hall ticket to attend the examination for the post of Sub-Engineer.^{Thatbeingso,certain} individuals, who do not possess the requisite diploma qualification filed W.P.Nos. 11991/2018 and 38028/2018, wherein, an interim direction was given to permit the Petitioners therein to appear for^{thewrittenexamination} with a rider that the result shall be kept in a sealed cover. As the said Petitioners possess qualification of Diploma from the^{InstituteofMechanical} Engineer India, Mumbai, which is totally prohibited, the written test was postponed. Assailing the postponement of examination,^{thePetitionerherein} along with other eligible candidates filed W.P.No.28979^{of2019beforethe} Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh, wherein, an^{interimdirectiondated} 26.09.2018 directing the Respondents to conduct the written test. Accordingly, the Respondents have conducted the written^{testforthesaid} It is the contention of the Petitioner that, though^{hefoundqualifiedin} post.

¶58

¶59

the written examination, he could not get the appointment^{asSubEngineeron} par with one D.Nageswara Rao and others.

¶60

Admittedly, the Petitioner belongs to Mechanical Engineering Department and said Nageswara Rao, belongs to Electrical Engineering The contention of the Petitioner that his case has to be Department, considered on par with said Negeswara Rao, cannot be^{considered,sincethe}

¶61

Petitioner belongs to Zone-1 and said Nageswara Rao belongs to^Zone-lland on deputation working in Zone-1 that too as there is^{novacancyinZone-1for} Mechanical stream, as submitted by the learned Standing^Counsel, Further, said Nageswara Rao, who belongs to Zone-ll was deputed to Zone-1. It is not the case of the Petitioner that the post of said Nageswara Rao^{wasallottedin}

¶62

Zone-1. As rightly, put by the learned Standing Counsel, since^thepromotion for Sub-Engineer is zonal wise promotion and that the^{Petitioner,whofallsin} Zone-1 is seeking his promotion in Zone-ll and also^{asthereisnovacancyfor} the said post in Zone-1, the case of the Petitioner^{cannotbeconsidered.} There is no merit in the contentions raised by the^Petitioner. Accordingly, the petition deserves dismissal. 8. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There^{shallbenoorderas} to costs.

¶63

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any,^{pendingshallstand} closed.

¶64

SD/- A. VENUGOPALA RAO assistant REGISTR^

//true copy//

t5FFlCER SE

To,

Sri. D Linga Rao 1. One CC to