Telangana High Court
Marri Mahitha vs The Commissioner Of Commercialtaxes, on 13 August, 2025
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN
WRIT APPEAL No.863 of 2025
JUDGMENT:
Heard Sri M.Srikanth, learned counsel for the
appellant. Also heard Sri Santhapur Satyanarayana Rao,
learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing for
the respondents.
2. This writ appeal is directed against the order dated
28.05.2025 passed in W.P.No.40636 of 2016, whereby the
learned writ court has dismissed the writ petition filed by
the appellant.
3. The appellant was appointed as Junior Assistant in
the Commercial Taxes Department on compassionate
grounds on 20.01.2004. She claims to have passed all the
departmental tests, including Marwari and Gujarathi
Language tests in 2012 and 2013 itself respectively, to
become eligible to the post of Senior Assistant (Language)
existing at that time. When the promotional exercise for
general vacancies was conducted, she got promoted as
Senior Assistant on 01.10.2014 against regular post of
Senior Assistant. She approached the writ court in the
year 2016 for considering her case against the available
vacancy for the post of Senior Assistant (Language), since
she has acquired eligibility and qualification in March
2013. The learned writ court, on the basis of the pleadings
on record, declined the relief holding that by the circular
dated 17.05.2013, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
had issued instructions to all the Nodal Deputy
Commissioners (CT) that once the persons are occupying
the posts of Senior Assistants and/or ACTOs (Language)
(M&G) retire/got promotion/otherwise move out, such
posts would get converted to general category post of
Senior Assistant/ACTO as the case may be and thereafter
no person shall be posted or promoted as Senior
Assistant/ACTO (M&G) category against these posts. This
circular was not under challenge. The learned writ court
rejected the contention of the appellant that though the
extant rules of the Andhra Pradesh Commercial Taxes
Subordinate Service Rules were not amended removing the
post of Senior Assistant (Language) or ACTO (Language),
the Government had no power or authority to delete the
said post by way of passing any executive order. However,
the learned writ court did not find any merit in the case of
the appellant and dismissed the writ petition. Being
aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
4. So far as the legal position is concerned, it is true
that the statutory rule cannot be overridden by an
administrative circular. The administrative circular issued
under Article 162 of the Constitution of India can only fill
up the void where the rules are silent. However, on facts,
we find that the appellant had already accepted promotion
to the post of Senior Assistant as back as on 01.10.2014
against the regular post and acquiesced in the process of
promotion. She has later on turned around and preferred
the writ petition for notional seniority in the cadre of Senior
Assistant (Language) with all consequential benefits
including seniority. It was open for the appellant to raise
her claim at the appropriate time when the promotional
exercise was being considered, which she failed to do.
Such belated claim after accepting the promotional post
should not be allowed, moreover, when apparently there is
no difference in the scale of pay or grade pay to the
promoted post which the appellant is holding.
5. Therefore, we do not feel it necessary to get into the
question of the validity of the circular dated 17.05.2013,
more so, when the same was not under challenge in the
writ petition.
6. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the appeal
and the same is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be
no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
______________________________________
APARESH KUMAR SINGH, CJ
______________________________________
G.M.MOHIUDDIN, J
13.08.2025
vs
