Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 5569 AP
Judgement Date : 29 December, 2021
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE: WRIT PETITION No.30147 of 2021
PROCEEDING SHEET
Sl OFFICE
DATE ORDER
No NOTE
2. 29.12.2021 NJS,J
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner , the
learned Government Pleader for Services-I and Sri
N.A. Ramachandra Murthy, learned Standing
Counsel for A.P.P.S.C.
The grievance of the petitioner, in the present
writ petition, is that though he has completed two
years period of probation long back and completed
16 years of service, his case for promotion is not
being considered, in the wake of Memo dated
04.8.2021 impugned in the Writ Petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner was initially appointed as
Senior Accountant (Non-Executive Post) in
Treasuries and Accounts Department, as per the
Selection List 2005 published by the A.P.P.S.C.,
and posted in the Office of Sub-Treasury,
Nandyala, Kurnool District, vide Proceedings dated
22.6.2005. He has completed his probation on
19.8.2009, after passing all the Departmental
examinations including Accounts Test. Learned
counsel submits that in the context of judgment of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in M.Surender Reddy vs.
State of A.P., the A.P.P.S.C., conducted fresh
selections in supersession of the earlier selections
and as per the revised Selection List 2017, the
petitioner was selected as Assistant Auditor and
posted in the Pay and Accounts Office,
2
Writ Petition No.30147 of 2021
Ibrahimpatnam. He further submits that the
A.P.P.S.C., once again conducted fresh selections
in supersession of the earlier two selection lists
and in the revised Selection List of 2018, the
petitioner was again selected as Senior Accountant
(Non-Executive Post) in the Treasuries and
Accounts Department and posted at Head Office,
DTA, Branch-I.
The contention of learned counsel for the
petitioner is that despite the completion of the
period of probation, the insistence of the
respondents requiring the petitioner to undergo
probation in terms of the impugned Memo dated 04.8.2021 is not sustainable. He further submits that ignoring the case of the petitioner, the respondents are taking steps to effect the promotions to the cadre of Accounts Officer in the Directorate of Treasuries and Accounts to the detriment of the petitioner.
On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader for Services-I submits that the Feeder Category/Cadre in Pay & Accounts Department and Treasuries & Accounts Department are different and therefore the respondent authorities are justified in requiring the petitioner to undergo probation. He seeks time to file counter.
Considering the submissions made, prima facie this Court is satisfied that the action of the respondents in insisting the petitioner to undergo probation after completion of 16 years of service is not tenable.
Writ Petition No.30147 of 2021
In such view of the matter, there shall be interim direction to the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotions without reference to the Memo dated 04.8.2021, and by taking into consideration his representation dated 01.12.2021.
List the matter after four (4) weeks, for filing counter.
_________ NJS, J vasu
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!