Telangana High Court
K. Babu Rao vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh Rep. By ... on 15 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017
Date:15.04.2026
Between:
K. Babu Rao.
...Petitioner
And
The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its
Principal Secretary, Irrigation & CAD Department and
others.
...Respondents
ORDER:
Heard Sri D. Linga Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri B. Sravan Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri K. Babu Rao, learned counsel for the respondent No.5.
2. This writ petition is filed seeking to direct the official respondents to declare that the petitioner is entitled to be promoted as Senior Assistant on notional basis in the vacancy arisen in panel year 2008-09 by fixing his seniority 2 SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017 over and above that of the respondent Nos.4 to 6 in accordance with the provisions of Rule 6 and 16(h) of the Telangana State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 (for short 'the Rules') by taking into account the date of passing of Departmental Tests with all consequential benefits by holding the action of the official respondents in effecting promotion by clubbing vacancies of different panel years and without reference to date of passing of Departmental Tests as illegal and arbitrary.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as Attender on 20.03.1981, subsequently appointed by transfer as Typist in March, 1992, passed Accounts Test on 19.10.2008 and further promoted as Senior Assistant on 30.06.2011 though vacancy was available from February, 2010. The official respondents have promoted the unofficial respondent Nos.4 and 5 as Senior Assistants in the vacancies arisen in August, 2010 though they have passed Departmental Tests on 06.10.2010 and 10.02.2010 respectively ignoring the petitioner's claim for promotion in 3 SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017 spite of the fact that he has passed Departmental Tests much earlier to them. Likewise, the respondent No.6, who has not passed the departmental test, was allowed to cross 45 years and promoted as Senior Assistant on 25.08.2010 against the post which fell vacant in August, 2010.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner being Scheduled Tribe Community is entitled for reservation in promotions. As per Rule 6 of the Rules, 1996, list of candidates eligible for promotion has to be prepared on annual basis and vacancies available during the respective panel years have to be necessarily filled up with the eligible candidates during the year starting from 1st September of the year and as per Rule 16(h) of the Rules, 1996, date of passing of tests has to be taken as criteria for determining seniority. Once vacancies have arisen during the panel year, the respondents ought to have considered the candidature of petitioner for promotion as Senior Assistant in preference to the claim of seniors who were ineligible for such promotion either on the ground of non passing of tests or 4 SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017 non crossing of 45 years of age so as to available exemption from passing of departmental tests. He submits that the petitioner is entitled for notional promotion by fixing his seniority over and above that of the respondent Nos.4 to 6 with all consequential benefits and requested to allow the writ petition.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied on the following Judgments;
1. Vijay Singh Charak vs. Union of India1
2. R.Prabha Devi vs. Government of India 2
6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I basing on the counter submits that the petitioner has passed Account Test during the year October, 2008 and the vacancy has arisen during February, 2010. As per ROR, the vacancy reserved for S.C. vide roaster point -7 and the eligible candidate Sri P. Venkataiah, Typist, who have passed Account Test during February, 2010, was promoted in that vacancy as per ROR and the petitioner is 1 (2007) 9 SCC 743 2 AIR 1988 SC 902 5 SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017 not eligible for promotion against that roaster point as he belongs to Scheduled Tribe. As per Rule 5(b) of the Rules, the posts of Senior Assistants, Superintendents etc., are all non-gazette posts comes under non-selection posts and there is no D.P.C for these posts as per Rule 6(h)(i) of the Rules. For non selection posts, the Superintending Engineer of concerned circle will prepare the seniority list and the promotions will be considered as per seniority cum eligibility. All the Senior Assistant Vacancies of the circle are filled up only as per the Seniority and Eligibility as per Rules. The respondent Nos.4 and 5 have passed Account Test on 10.02.2010 and 06.10.2010 respectively and the petitioner has passed Account Test during October, 2008, but no juniors to the petitioner have promoted to the post of Senior Assistant ignoring the petitioner and all the candidates promoted as Senior Assistants are seniors to the petitioner as they were eligible for promotion by passing Account Test/exemption due to completion of 45 years of age and they have promoted as per seniority and eligibility 6 SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017 at their turn and finally the petitioner was promoted as Senior Assistant on 30.06.2011 as per his turn.
7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that the cadre wise seniority list were prepared by the Superintending Engineer and as per seniority/eligibility, the candidates were promoted at their turn only and as the petitioner has not got his turn and as his seniors have become eligible for promotion as on the date of vacancy arisen, they were promoted and the petitioner was not promoted as there was no vacancy for him and there is no delay made to favour any other and also no favour was made to the respondent No.6 as he got his promotion at his turn as per Rules in the vacancy arisen in August, 2010. The circle is having the division of Zone-V and Zone-VI and there is a dispute of seniority of the circle establishment and there are representations on the zonal issue. The petitioner made a representation on 14.10.2010 to consider his promotion out of way under ROR, for which he is not eligible. He further submits that the cadre wise seniority list of the unit were prepared as 7 SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017 per Rules and the vacancies were filled up with the eligible candidates and no vacancies were left over and further, no tests are prescribed to these posts to pass during the probation period and the promotions were issued in order as per the Rules. In fact, the petitioner has given a declaration that he has no objection against the seniority list dated 23.09.2010 and all the candidates were promoted as per seniority and eligibility at their turn as per Rules and hence, the petitioner cannot be promoted notionally over and above the respondent Nos.4 to 6 which is against the Rules and requested to dismiss the writ petition.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent No.5 basing on the counter submits that the candidate is having right to be considered for promotion as and when vacancies were filled, but he has no right to seek a direction to fill up the vacancies as and when arose. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition with delay and without giving any reason and the same is liable to be dismissed on the ground of delay.
8
SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017
9. After hearing both sides and perusing the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is seeking notional promotion as Senior Assistant in the vacancy arisen in panel year 2008-09 by fixing his seniority over and above that of the respondentNos.4 to 6. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner being Scheduled Tribe Community is entitled for reservation in promotions. The respondents have not prepared the panel for the said year and without giving promotion to the petitioner as Senior Assistant given promotions to the respondent Nos.4 to 6. In view of the same, he is entitled for promotion from the panel year 2008-09. [[{{{{[[[[[{{{[[
10. The contention of the respondents is that the petitioner is not eligible for promotion as per the roster point as he belongs to the Scheduled Tribe Community. The posts of Senior Assistants, Superintendents etc., are all non-gazette posts comes under non-selection posts and further, there is no DPC for these posts as per Rule 6(h)(i) of the Rules and no junior to the petitioner was promoted 9 SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017 and the petitioner was promoted on 30.06.2011 as per his turn.
11. The unit of appointment for the post of Senior Assistant is circle and the respondent Nos.4 to 6 are not on the same circles and they are seniors to the petitioner. As the record shows that the petitioner has given declaration that he has no objection against the seniority list dated 29.03.2010. No junior was promoted before promoting the petitioner in the year 2011. In view of the same, the question of granting notional seniority to the petitioner from the year 2008-09 and fixing seniority over and above the respondent Nos.4 to 6 does not arise. In view of the same, there are no merits in the writ petition and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
12. The Judgments relied on by the learned for the petitioner in Vijay Singh Charak's case (1 supra) and R.Prabha Devi's case (2 supra) are not apply to the facts of this case.
10
SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Government of West Bengal vs. Dr. Amal Satpathi3 held in para Nos.19 and 21 as follows;
"19. It is a well settled principle that promotion becomes effective from the date it is granted, rather than from the date a vacancy arises or the post is created. While the Courts have recognized the right to be considered for promotion as not only a statutory right but also a fundamental right, there is no fundamental right to the promotion itself. xxxxxxxxxx
21. While we recognize respondent No. 1's right to be considered for promotion, which is a fundamental right under Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India, he does not hold an absolute right to the promotion itself. The legal precedents discussed above establish that promotion only becomes effective upon the assumption of duties on the promotional post and not on the date of occurrence of the vacancy or the date of recommendation". xxxxxxxx (Emphasis supplied) The above findings are squarely apply to the instant case. The granting of notional promotion from the date of passing of departmental test by the petitioner cannot be acceptable and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
3 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3512 11 SK, J W.P.(TR).No.795 of 2017
14. In view of the above findings, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
15. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
_____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH Date15.04.2026.
sj