GUGULOTHU RAMA KOTI Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners approached this Court aggrieved by the action of the State Government in issuing Memo No. 73, dtd. 24/7/2021 and Memo No.1356 dtd. 24/7/2021 in particular Para 5 thereof, by which the Government contemplated a review of promotions granted after 2/6/2014. The purported basis for this exercise was the Division Bench judgment of this Court dtd. 11/12/2018 in Writ Petition No. 4415 of 2016; however, petitioners contend that the impugned action, instead of being a faithful implementation of that judgment, is in clear violation of constitutional provisions, the mandate of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and the settled principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of cases as well as by this Court.

(2.) It is the case of petitioners that their promotions were effected under G.O.Ms.No.5 dtd. 14/2/2003 and G.O.Ms.No.26 dtd. 20/2/2009, which provided for reservation in promotion with consequential seniority to members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. They assert that after the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 4415 of 2016, the State constituted a Committee, collected cadre-wise data and affirmed before this Court in contempt proceedings that the exercise prescribed in M. Nagaraj v. Union of India, (2006) 8 SCC 212. had been duly undertaken.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioners Sri Jogram Tejavath draws attention of this Court to the constitutional background and case law. He contends that this Court in its order dtd. 11/12/2018 in Writ Petition No. 4415 of 2016 upheld G.O.Ms.No. 26, dtd. 20/2/2009 with regard to consequential seniority to the individual who got promoted under Rule of Reservation. In the said judgment, it was advised to review the promotions which were considered earlier in the State. According to learned counsel, the intention of this Court is to review the matter where consequential seniority is not considered, but the State Government had misinterpreted and revised the seniority status that if the adequate is raised in the particular cadre, the promotions' should be considered based on the initial category seniority which is quash against the above said order. Promotions which were considered earlier degrades the SC/ST candidates against the constitutional amendment and verdict of the Supreme Court of India. Learned counsel accuses that the Law Department and Finance Department have not followed the said procedure and they have followed the consequential seniority.