ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. T S SASTRY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent herein was appointed as Trainee Inspector with the appellant-Insurance Co. on 14-3-1977 w.e.f. 1-1-1978. He was categorised as Grade I Inspector. In the year 1983, 8 posts of Assistant Administrative Officer (Development) fell vacant. It is not disputed that the said vacancies were required to be filled up on the basis of merit-cum-seniority. It is also not disputed that the respondent herein was also eligible for being considered for promotion to the said post. The committee constituted for making promotion after considering the merit of the candidates, prepared a panel of 8 names for the purpose of promotion to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer (Development). However, the respondent herein was put on the waiting list at Sl. No. 9 thereof.

(2.) In November 1984, one more post of Assistant Administrative Officer (Development) was created and subsequently on 22-5-1985 a second post was further created. It is not disputed that the panel prepared by the Promotion Committee was valid from 5th July, 1984 to 4th July, 1985. Having regard to the availability of two more posts, the respondent herein made a representation to the competent authority for promoting him on one of these said posts. However, the respondent, having not received any reply, filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Insurance company to promote him to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer (Development). A learned single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition. However, on a writ appeal being filed by the respondent herein, the judgment and order of the single Judge was set aside and the appeal was allowed by issuing a direction to give notional promotion and seniority to the respondent with effect from the date when the Branches at Srikakulam and Kurnool were opened in 1984. However, the respondent herein was held to be entitled to monetary benefit only from the date of filing of the writ petition. The appellant herein filed a review petition before the High Court which was dismissed. Aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us by means of special leave petitions.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant urged that in view of the Promotion Policy framed by the appellant-Insurance Co., the said vacancies could not have been directed to be filled up by a person on the waiting list of panel prepared in the year 1984. Learned counsel referred to the Promotion Policy for promotion of Inspector Grade I to the cadre of Assistant Administrative Officer, para 2 whereof runs as under :