IQBAL AHMED Vs. STATE OF A P REP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY our order dated 03. 08. 2009, while issuing notice before admission, we have passed a reasoned interim order, granting interim suspension. The said order is as follows: "notice before admission. Learned Government Pleader takes notices for respondents 1 and 2. Issue notice to respondent No. 3 returnable in ten days. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall also takes notice for R-3 by R. P. A. D. and file proof of service. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner figured above the 3rd respondent in the provisional seniority list of Multi Zone-ll issued by the Commissioner of industries vide Memo dated 13. 02. 2007 calling for objections from the affected persons. It is stated that the 3rd respondent filed her objections on 02. 03. 2007 and the said objections were considered and rejected by a reasoned order vide Memo No. 22/2/2008/260, dated 23. 08. 2008 by the 2nd respondent. The said memo was not questioned by the 3rd respondent for about one year. After issuing the proceedings communicating final seniority list vide proceedings dated 18. 07. 2009, the 3rd respondent questioned the same before the A. P. Administrative Tribunal in o. A. No. 8601 of 2009 and the Tribunal, without issuing any notice to the petitioner and other affected persons, suspended the entire final seniority list. It is stated that the petitioner is due to get promotion as Deputy Director from the post of Assistant Director and he is also going to retire within few months. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal ought not to have granted an ex parte suspension order, more so, when the objection was rejected a year back and the 3rd respondent has not questioned same. In this view of the matter, there shall be an interim suspension as prayed for. "

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 3 has now filed wvmp. No. 3155/2009 seeking vacation of the said interim order. The official respondents through the learned Government pleader, Services-l, have filed a counter affidavit together with documents.

(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the writ petitioner, learned Government pleader, appearing for respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and the learned counsel, appearing for the 3rd respondent, and with the consent of all the learned counsel, the writ petition is being disposed of.