G.Ratna Prasad vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2022 Latest Caselaw 3637 AP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3637 AP
Judgement Date : 6 July, 2022

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

G.Ratna Prasad vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 6 July, 2022

            THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

             WRIT PETITION Nos. 23314 and 24527 of 2020

COMMON ORDER:

      Writ Petition No.23314 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, claiming the following relief:


      ".....Issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of
      writ of Mandamus declaring that

      (a) petitioner is entitled to be shown at Sl.No.34A of the Seniority List
            issued in Memo No AII(2)54/2017, dated 05.03.2019 as indicated
            in Memo No.AI1(2)1154/2005, dated 07.04.2019 as confirmed in
            Memo    No    AI1(1)1154/2019,    dated   20.12.2019   of   the   2nd
            respondent.

(b) petitioner is entitled to be promoted on par with juniors (by giving notional date of promotion) to the cadres of Assistant Director of Agriculture, Deputy Director of Agriculture and Joint Director of Agriculture with all consequential benefits.

(c) The inaction on the part of respondents 1 and 2 in taking prompt action even after the judgment of Honble High Court dated 30.04.2018 in W.P.No.34387 of 2012. It is therefore illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and therefore violative of the Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India

(d) and pass such other orders."

Writ Petition No.24527 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, claiming the following relief:

".....Issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring

(a) petitioner is entitled to be shown at SI.No.30A of the Seniority List issued in Memo No.Estt.A7(1)22/2004, dated 15.03.2004 as indicated in Memo No.AII(1)1078/2018, dated 06.03.2019 as confirmed in Memo No.AI1(1)1078/2018 dated 30.12.2019 of the 2nd respondent.

(b) petitioner is entitled to be promoted on par with juniors (by giving notional date of promotion) to the cadres of Assistant Director of Agriculture, Deputy Director of Agriculture and Joint Director of Agriculture with all consequential benefits.

(c) the inaction on the part of respondents 1 and 2 in not taking prompt action even after the judgment of Hon'ble High Court dated 06.09.2018 in W.P.No.36489 of 2012 is therefore illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and therefore, violative of the Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(d) and pass such other orders."

2. Since the facts and issue involved in both the writ petitions

is one and the same, I find it expedient to decide both the matters by

common order.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned

counsel for the respondents.

4. Though the petitioners in both the writ petitions made

several allegations against the respondents, during the course of

hearing learned counsel for the petitioners requested this Court to

issue a direction to the respondents to consider the representations

submitted by the petitioners, basing on the recommendations made

by the by the Special Commissioner of Agriculture, Guntur vide

Lr.No.A1(2) 20/2020, dated 21.10.2021; so also DDA and JDA during

the panel years 2007-08 and 2014-15 for the petitioner in

W.P.No.24527 of 2020 vide Letter No. A1(2) 25/2020, dated

27.10.2021, without touching the merits of the case.

5. Learned Government Pleader for Services-II placed on record

the letter in W.P.No.23114 of 2020 vide Lr.No. A1(2) 20/2020, dated

21.10.2021, wherein the Special Commissioner of Agriculture, A.P,

Guntur made recommendations to the Special Chief Secretary to

Government (A & C) Agri-I, Department, A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi

for clarification, wherein it is mentioned as follows:

"It is informed that, the seniority list in the cadre of Deputy Director of Agriculture was revised and the

name of Sri G. Ratna Prasad, DPD, I/o PD, ATMA, Chittoor District was fixed in the cadre of Deputy Director of Agriculture above the name of Sri U. Narasimha Rao, who was junior in the cadre of DDA during the panel year 2009-2010 i.e who was promoted as DDA w.e.f 26.11.2010.

So also learned Government Pleader for Services-II placed on

record the letter in W.P.No.24527 of 2020 vide Lr.No. A1(2) 25/2020,

dated 27.10.2021, wherein the Special Commissioner of Agriculture,

A.P, Guntur made recommendations to the Special Chief Secretary to

Government (A & C) Agri-I, Department, A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi

for clarification, wherein it is mentioned as follows:

"Based on the above facts, review DPC was conducted for the year 2004-05 and notional promotion with retrospective effect in respect of Sri Ch. Srinivasa Rao, ADA, O/o ADA, Jaggaiahpeta, Krishna District as ADA was considered from the panel year 2003-04 i.e the appointment of Sri K.H.V.Livingston, ADA who is junior to him in the cadre of Agricultural Officer. Accordingly DPC members have approved the minutes vide reference 4th cited".

6. Therefore, it is made clear that the respondent authorities

have recommended for notional promotion as stated supra, which was

also forwarded to the Special Chief Secretary to Government for

clarification, but the same is pending with the authorities.

7. In view of the submission of Learned Government Pleader for

Agriculture and Learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing

for respondents, I need not decide the truth or otherwise of the

allegations made in the writ petition.

8. This Court is conscious that no such direction be issued in

view of the judgment of the Apex Court in The Government of India

v. P.Venkatesh1, wherein the Apex Court held that such orders may

be passed for a quick or easy disposal of cases in overburdened