THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
WRIT APPEAL No.581 of 2019
JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeal is arising out of the order
dated 18.06.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in
W.P.No.27083 of 2017.
The facts of the case reveal that the writ petition
was preferred by the respondents No.3 and 4 herein
stating that the bye-laws of the Society are not being followed in the matter of promotion. The learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition with a direction to follow the bye-laws. The undisputed facts make it very clear that for the purpose of promotion to the post of Assistant Secretary, the post has to be filled up from the staff of the category of Office Superintendent in the Grade of Rs.840 - 1040. Undisputedly, the writ petitioners were in the aforesaid cadre and in those circumstances, the writ petition was disposed of directing the employer to consider their case also.
After the judgment was delivered in the year 2019 the respondent No.3 in the writ appeal was promoted on 27.06.2019 and he has attained the age of 2 superannuation also. The respondent No.4 was also promoted on the post of the Assistant Secretary.
The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the writ petition was not maintainable in the light of the judgment delivered by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.1807 of 2010 and batch decided on 04.07.2011, which was affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1527 of 2012 and batch decided on 06.12.2012. An appeal was preferred before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter and the same was also dismissed. Learned Counsel has argued before this Court that as the South Central Railway Employees' Cooperative Credit Society Limited is not a State and the learned Single Judge could not have entertained the writ petition.
The fact remains that the judgment was delivered in the year 2019, the respondent No.3 in the appeal was promoted in the year 2019, the respondent No.4 was also promoted as they holding the qualifications and as they were seniors to the appellant. This Court at this juncture, does not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The appellant before this Court has been able to establish that the respondent No.2 Society is not a State. He shall certainly 3 be free to take recourse to the remedies available for challenging the order of promotion of the respondents No.3 and 4 in accordance with law and the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.27083 of 2017 dated 18.06.2019 will not come in the way of the appellant.
With the aforesaid, the writ appeal stands disposed of. The miscellaneous applications pending in this writ appeal, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 24.11.2021 vs