K. TRIUPATI Vs. CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, APNPDCL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Appeal is filed aggrieved by the orders passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.11917 of 2004 dtd. 1/4/2015.

(2.) Heard Sri D. Linga Rao, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri Zakir Ali Danish, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

(3.) It has been contended by the appellant that initially he was appointed on compassionate grounds as Watchman on 21/5/1999 and his probation was declared on 20/5/2021. The appellant has further contended that while he was discharging his duties as Watchman, the respondents had considered the case of appellant for conversion as Lineman Driver, in view of the fact that the appellant was possessing requisite qualification as well as driving licence on 21/6/2021 and since then he has been discharging his duties as Lineman Driver. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the vehicle which was driven by the appellant has been taken as "not road worthy". In those set of circumstances, the respondents have deputed the appellant to work in the operation and maintenance unit vide proceedings dtd. 23/1/2022 and the appellant discharging his duties as lineman. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant also contended that when a vacancy of Lineman has arisen, appellant has requested the respondents to consider his case for conversion from the Lineman Driver to Lineman and the respondents have conducted a Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) on 7/8/2003 and the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) has cleared the name of appellant for conversion from the Lineman Driver to Lineman against roster point No.14 and law. The Divisional Engineer has sought clarification from the Chief General Manager as to whether the appellant can be converted from the post of Lineman Driver to Lineman vide proceedings dtd. 1/11/2003 and the Chief General Manager has clarified vide proceedings dtd. 18/1/2004 that the case of the appellant can be considered as the pay-scale of Lineman Driver and Lineman are one and the same and in pursuance to the clarification given by the Chief General Manager and D.E. had converted the appellant from the post of Lineman Driver to Lineman vide proceedings dtd. 27/1/2004. While the appellant was discharging the duties of Lineman after six months the respondents have issued proceedings dtd. 8/7/2004 cancelling the conversion on the ground that the regular driver one K. Yerraiah has retired from service on 30/6/2004 and posted the appellant back as Lineman Driver. Challenging the same, a writ petition was preferred before this Court and the learned Single Judge has dismissed the case erroneously without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the appellant.