G SURYANARAYANA Vs. CHAIRMAN VISAKHAPATNAM PORT TRUST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents to consider his case for promotion to the post of Machinist Grade-I and Charge Hand in accordance with 40 points Roster with all consequential benefits.

(2.) The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition are that die petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe. He was initially appointed as Machinist Grade-III on 28-5-1979. The services were regularised on 10-6-1980. He worked on adhoc-basis as Machinist Grade-II for three months in the year 1980. He passed prescribed trade test for promotion to the post of Grade-II Machinist on 13-5-1981. Therefore, he was again promoted on adhoc-basis as Grade-II Machinist. His case is that he was continued on adhoc-basis in the same post and finally his probation was declared with effect from 21-11-1987. From the said date he is functioning as Machinist Grade n only and he is not being promoted to the Grade-I and Charge Hand in the points reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidates the roster of reservation. As per the 40 point roster, 4th and 17th vacancy should be filled up by the Schedule Tribe candidate, the roster has not been followed and the general candidates have been promoted in the post reserved for Scheduled Tribes. In July 1989, when the petitioner was fully eligible for promotion to the post of charge hand, Sri B. Appala Raju, a F.C. candidate was promoted and in February, 1991, one another Sri Rama Rao was promoted. Thus the roster was followed in breach rather than in its spirit. He further submits that if a S.T. candidate is available, he should be appointed in the post reserved for S.T. and the same cannot be de-reserved nor an employee holding the up-grade post of Grade-I can be considered. The petitioner being only the S.T. candidate in the establishment in which he was working and even to him the reservation facility has been denied. Therefore, he seeks proper implementation of the roster system and consequential promotion to the post of Grade-I and Charge Hand respectively.

(3.) The Port Trust in the counter has admitted that the petitioner belongs to S.T. community, he was appointed on 28-5-1977. In 1988 two vacancies of Machinist Grade-II arose in O.R. section and as per 40 point promotional roster, the 4th point is reserved for S.T. The case of the petitioner was considered and he was promoted on ad-hoc basis with effect from 8-5-1980 pending trade test. The petitioner was reverted as Machinist Grade-Ill on 4-4-1980 as he failed in the trade test. Again another testwasconducted on 13-2-1981 in which he failed. For the third time when a test was conducted on 13-5-1981, he was successful. Accordingly, he was promoted as Machinist Grade-II on 26-10-1981 on regular basis, in short term vacancy against carry forward reservation for S.T. at 4th point. However again he was reverted on 5-12-1981, on recession of the vacancy. It is the case of the Respondent that the petitioner was continued as Officiating Grade-II from 22-12-1985 and therefore his probation was declared on 22-12-1987. In 1985 when a vacancy for Machinist Grade-I post fell vacant, which was to be fllled-up by S.T. candidate, but however since the petitioner was not eligible for promotion by that time, the post was carried forward and that the General Candidate was appointed. The petitioner became eligible for promotion as Grade-I with effect from 22-11-1987 only and therefore he could not have been promoted in 1985.