Telangana High Court
Erumalla Bala Raju, 39 Others, vs The Singareni Collieris Company Ltd., ... on 7 December, 2020
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT PETITION Nos.24641 and 17897 of 2015
COMMON ORDER:
Since the issue involved in these two writ petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by way of this common order.
For the sake of convenience, the facts in W.P.No.24641 of 2015 are discussed hereunder. This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
".... to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus - (a) declaring the action of the respondents in not promoting the petitioners as Junior Engineers E-l Grade from the dates on which they became eligible to be promoted in accordance with the Company Cadre Scheme; (b) consequently, direct the respondents to promote the petitioners on a time bound basis as contemplated under the Common Cadre Scheme and from the date on which they became eligible in accordance with the order and judgment dated 24.12.2013 in Writ Appeal No.2361 of 2003 together with all the benefits, including the arrears of pay and allowances due and payable to them on such promotion; (c) direct the respondents to compute the arrears of pay and allowances and pay the petitioners together with interest @ 9% per annum with quarterly rests from the date on which they are entitled for higher pay and allowances till the date of actual payment; (d) further declare that the petitioners are entitled to exemplary costs or having thrust this unwarranted lis on the petitioners and direct payment of the same by recovering the amount of interest and costs payable to AKS,J 2 W.P.Nos.24641 and 17897 of 2015 the petitioners from out of the personal funds of the officers responsible for this litigation; and pass such other order or orders ......"
Heard Sri Siva, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.24641 of 2015; and Sri Allu Midhun Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.17897 of 2015; and Sri K. Sanjeev Kumar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
It has been contended by the petitioners that they are all employed with the respondents Company in Civil Engineering Department and all the petitioners are due for promotion to the posts of Junior Engineer (E1 Grade), however, the respondents are not considering their cases for promotion to the said post under the time bound promotion policy of the respondents Company.
Learned counsel for the petitioners had contended that all the promotions in Civil Engineering Department right from the cadre of Junior Engineers (E1 Grade) are on time bound basis, but the respondents are not considering the cases of the petitioners in accordance with the time bound promotion policy of the respondents Company.
Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended that the issue raised in this writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 24.12.2013 in AKS,J 3 W.P.Nos.24641 and 17897 of 2015 W.A.No.2361 of 2003, wherein the Hon'ble Division Bench had allowed the Writ Appeal directing the respondents therein to consider the cases of the appellants therein for promotion on time bound scheme, subject to other eligibility criteria to be fulfilled and also subject to availability of vacancies. Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended that the said judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench was also confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide judgment dated 05.01.2015 in S.L.P.No.12976 of 2014 dismissing the SLP preferred by the respondents Company against the judgment dated 24.12.2013 in W.A.No.2361 of 2003. Learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, contends that the petitioners are all eligible for promotion to the posts of Junior Engineer (E1 Grade) from the dates on which they completed the minimum period of service and became eligible for promotion in accordance with the Company Cadre Scheme, however, the respondents are not considering their cases for further promotion in terms of the promotion policy of the respondents Company.
Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended that had the respondents implemented the promotion policy in accordance with the time bound scheme of the respondents, the petitioners ought to have been promoted as Junior Engineers (E1 Grade) way back in the year 1995 itself along with Sri B. Atchyutha Ramaiah. Learned counsel for the petitioners had further contended AKS,J 4 W.P.Nos.24641 and 17897 of 2015 that the issue, whether the respondents are extending time bound promotions in Civil Engineering Department or not? was pending before this Hon'ble Court and this Hon'ble Court finally resolved the said issue in favour of the employees working in Civil Engineering Department of the respondents Company vide judgment dated 24.12.2013 in W.A.No.2361 of 2003 and immediately, the petitioners have submitted a representation dated 17.02.2015 to consider their cases for promotion in terms of the said judgment dated 24.12.2013 in W.A.No.2361 of 2003, as the judgment rendered by the Division Bench is a judgment in rem and not a judgment in persona. Though the respondents have been assuring the petitioners that their cases would be considered, they have not considered the cases of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer (E1 Grade) in accordance with the time bound policy of the respondents Company. When the respondents are not acting on the representation submitted by the petitioners on 17.02.2015, the petitioners have filed the present writ petitions seeking promotion strictly in terms of the judgment dated 24.12.2013 in W.A.No.2361 of 2003 rendered by a Division Bench of this Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, contends that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petitions directing the respondents Company to consider the cases of the petitioners for promotion to the posts of Junior Engineer (E1 Grade) in accordance with the time bound policy of the respondents Company and also in accordance with the judgment dated AKS,J 5 W.P.Nos.24641 and 17897 of 2015 24.12.2013 in W.A.No.2361 of 2003 rendered by a Division Bench of this Court and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
On the other hand, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents had contended that though the promotion to the posts of Junior Engineer (E1 Grade) is as per the time bound scheme of the respondents Company, the same is subject to availability of vacancies. He further contended that on earlier occasion, vide judgment dated 09.02.2002 in W.A.No.705 of 2000 passed by a Division Bench of this Court, the matter was remanded to the learned single Judge for fresh consideration, wherein there is a specific observation that as to whether the writ petitioner has any existing legal right as on the relevant date would be dependent on the vacancy position as was obtaining by that time and the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition by accepting the contention of the respondents that promotions have to be made subject to availability of vacancies. As those observations have attained finality, the question of considering the cases of the petitioners for promotion as per the time bound policy of the respondents Company would not arise and the cases of the petitioners would be considered whenever the vacancies would arise and when there are no vacancies, the question of considering the cases of the petitioners along with the case of Sri B. Atchyutha Ramaiah would not arise. In view of the above AKS,J 6 W.P.Nos.24641 and 17897 of 2015 stated facts, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents Company contends that there are no merits and the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed.
This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, is of the considered view that all the above contentions raised by the learned Special Government Pleader have been considered by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 24.12.2013 in W.A.No.2361 of 2003 and the contentions raised by the learned Special Government Pleader have been considered at paras 13 - 15 as Issue No.1 in the said Writ Appeal and the same were rejected and a direction was given to the respondents therein to consider the cases of the appellants therein in accordance with the time bound scheme of the respondents Company. Therefore, this Court cannot accept the contention of the learned Special Government Pleader as they are all considered by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 24.12.2013 in W.A.No.2361 of 2003.
In view of the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the considered view that both these writ petitions are liable to be allowed directing the respondents Company to consider the cases of the petitioners for promotion to the posts of Junior Engineer (E1 Grade) with all consequential benefits as per the time bound scheme of the respondents Company, if they fulfil AKS,J 7 W.P.Nos.24641 and 17897 of 2015 the eligibility criteria and subject to availability of vacancies in the said category. No order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 07.12.2020.
Msr AKS,J 8 W.P.Nos.24641 and 17897 of 2015 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION Nos.24641 and 17897 of 2015 07.12.2020 (Msr)