The Honble the Chief Justice is pleased to pass the following order The following members working in Category 4 and 5 of Division II i.e Assistants Examiners and Typists Copyists who have appeared for the Written and Oral Test companyducted by the N.I.C. officials on 1.11.2000 and who have qualified in the tests, are promoted and appointed as Computer Operators on temporary basis.
V.Subrahmanya Sarma 24 04 1961 20 12 1985 B.Com, LLB.
The first respondent companytended before the High Court that he had the necessary qualification when the examination for the posts of companyputer operators was companyducted, whereas the appellants of SLP Nos.
He was already promoted to the higher post in Category 1 of Division II i.e. Translators Deputy Section Officers by High Court order dated 11.3.2005 and therefore, his name did number figure in this seniority list of Computer Operators.
598 and 5318/2009, did number have those qualifications at the outset, but acquired the same within the subsequent period of two years which was permitted by the High Court.
In the gradation list of 19 employees that was finalized, the two appellants of SLP No.
It directed the Registrar Administration to refix the seniority of the companyputer operators, taking the date of their acquiring requisite qualifications as per rules 7 7 and 8 4 of the relevant rules, and accord companysequential benefits arising therefrom.
service Date of Apptt.
1, 2, 3, 9 10 above by one more year by a further numberification of Registrar Administration dated 23.11.2001, during which period they acquired the necessary qualification.
The Division Bench has taken the view that since the first respondent had those qualifications right at the outset, the first respondent ought to have been shown senior over the three appellants in SLP Nos.
5150 Approved Qualified Nil Nil Accounts Probationer Translation Sl.
The three appellants are aggrieved by this judgment and order, and have therefore, filed SLP Nos.
Status of Whether Punishments Remarks al Tests the qualified for and detents Employee the next promotion Accounts Rs.
II i.e. COMPUTER OPERATORS AS ON 01 07 2005 Sl.
5.11.2001 P. Nagarjuna Rao, dt.
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD GRADATION SENIORITY LIST IN THE CATEGORY 3 B OF DIV.
598/2009 and 5318/2009.
To the Category T. Tirumala Devi 13 06 1966 12 07 1994 M.Com, BAL, 07 11 2000 PGDCP, Type E H Department Pay Rs.
Sd Registrar Administration It so transpired that this period for passing of the examination was further extended by the High Court for all the five candidates at Sr.
1 herein.
The respondent No.
Sub ESTABLISHMENT HIGH COURT OF A.P., HYDERBAD S Sri K. Balarama Raju, Mohd.
Thereafter, the Registrar Administration prepared the gradation seniority list of companyputer operators as on 1.7.2005 and invited the objections representations on or before 10.11.2005 vide his numberification dated 23.9.2005.
The respondent No.
Name Date of Birth Date of Educational Sarvasri entrance into Qualifications Govt.
6950 Approved Qualified Nil Nil Accounts Probationer Translation As far as the appellant of Appeal No.
He was however, subsequently promoted to the post of Deputy Section Officer under High Court order dated 10.12.2007, but was placed much junior to these appellants.
Sanaullah Ansari, dt.
They had been granted the relaxation to obtain the qualification which was permissible.
Name Date of Birth Date of Educational Sarvasri entrance into Qualifications Govt.
1 once again submitted his objection on 10.10.2005.
5640 Approved Qualified Nil Nil Translation Probationer Sl.
K. Balarama Raju, dt.
As against that, the submission of the three appellants was that they had passed the preliminary examination companyducted by the High Court alongwith the first respondent, and had obtained more marks than him.
service Date of Apptt.
As against that, the submission of the first respondent is that on the basis of the aforesaid rules 7 7 and 8 4 the candidates had to have the necessary qualifications and special qualifications at the outset.
1 objected to the fact that the candidates who did number possess the requisite qualifications at the outset were shown senior to him.
27.10.2001 T. Tirumala Devi, dt.
07 11 2000 Type E H , Type T H PGDCA, PGD in Cyber Laws Legal Information System Department Pay Rs.
The further representation of the respondent No.
He submitted that therefore, the High Court was wrong in giving the ranks in the gradation list, and he should have been shown senior to these three appellants.
Status of Whether Punishments Remarks al Tests the qualified for and detents Employee the next promotion CPC, Rs.
1 dated 10.10.2005 was rejected by the High Court by its proceedings dated 16.11.2007.
Sanaullah Ansari 14 07 1963 21 02 1990 B.SC, LL.B, 07 11 2000 Type E H PGDCA Department Pay Rs.
598/2009.
Sanaullah Ansari Assistant T. Tirumala Devi Typist Ch.
1, 2 ,3, 9 and 10 shall acquire the requisite prescribed qualifications within one year failing which they shall be reverted.
The subsequent seniority list of the companyputer operation as on 1.7.2005 was based on this order dated 7.11.2000, and the decision of the High Court administration was companyrect.
1, 2 and 3 above the first respondent in the order dated 7.11.2000, although they had acquired the requisite diplomas subsequent to the preliminary examination.
He then sought the review of that order by his application dated 19.2.2004 but he did number receive any response.
He submitted his representation for getting his companyrect seniority in the category of companyputer operators.
V. Subrahmanya Sarma Typist M.V.S. Navinchandra Copyist N. Chandrasekhar Rao Copyist V. Satyanarayana Typist L. Lakshmi Babu Typist P. Nagarjuna Rao Assistant L. Ramachandra Rao Assistant The members shown at S.Nos.
The above said appointments are made purely on temporary and on an adhoc basis without any preferential claim to future re promotion or seniority and are liable to be reverted at any time without any numberice and without assigning any reason.
To the Category Ch.
119/2008.
He made a representation on 2.11.2001, but that was rejected by the order passed by the High Court on 15.11.2003.
The High Court therefore allowed the Writ Petition filed by the first respondent, and set aside the gradation list published under numberification dated 23.9.2005.
Name Date of Birth Date of Educational Sarvasri entrance into Qualifications Govt.
The other two petitions have been directed to be tagged along with SLP No.
In the meanwhile, the Registrar Administration proceeded to finalise the seniority of the companyputer operators for companysideration for promotion to the next higher post namely that of Deputy Section Officer.
5318/2009 were shown senior to respondent No.
To the Category Mohd.
27.10.2001 Modh.
service Date of Apptt.
598/2009 K. Balarama Raju is companycerned he was at Sl.
He therefore, challenged the proceeding of the High Court dated 16.11.2007, companymunicating rejection of his representation in response to the gradation list of companyputer operators as on 1.7.2005 by filing Writ Petition No.
It is therefore, that they were shown at S.Nos.
Name Designation Sarvasri K. Balarama Raju Assistant Mohd.
1 in the earlier order dated 7.11.2000.
Status of Whether Punishments Remarks al Tests the qualified for and detents Employee the next promotion CPC, Rs.
