Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 928 (AP)

P. Dhanraj v. A. P. Backward Class Cooperative

2011-11-02

L.NARASIMHA REDDY

body2011
Judgment : The petitioner joined the service of A.P. Backward Classes Cooperative Finance Corporation Limited, respondent No.1 herein, as Typist in the year 1981 and he was re-designated as Junior Assistant. Subsequently, he earned promotions to the post of Senior Assistant and Superintendent in the year 1984 and 1997 respectively. In the year 2008, steps were initiated for promotion to the post of Superintendent. However, on the ground that he did not pass accounts test and Higher Diploma in Cooperation (H.D.C.), he was denied promotion. He filed W.P.No.12166 of 2009 feeling aggrieved by the denial of the promotion. The writ petition was allowed on 30.03.2010 holding that the stipulation as to pass in accounts test and H.D.C. did not exist at a time when the petitioner was promoted to the post of Superintendent. Accordingly, the petitioner came to be appointed as Assistant Accounts Officer on 30.04.2010. 2. The post of Manager (Finance) fell vacant in respondent No.1 with effect from 01.01.2010. Respondent No.1 has appointed respondent No.3 herein as Manager (Finance) by transferring him from the A.P. Backward Classes Service Cooperative Society through proceedings, dated 11.02.2010. The petitioner challenges the said proceedings. He contends that he is qualified to be promoted to the post of Manager (Finance) and there is absolutely no justification for respondent No. 1 in posting respondent No.3 against that vacancy. 3. On behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2, a counter-affidavit is filed. It is stated that the petitioner is not qualified to be promoted to the post of Manager (Finance), since he did not pass the accounts test. Reliance is placed upon the rules framed by the Corporation for its employees. 4. Heard Sri W.B.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Chandraiah Sunkara, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is about the denial of promotion to the post of Manager (Finance). The Government brought into existence respondent No.1 for promoting the interests of backward classes. It functions at State level. The Backward Classes Cooperative Societies are established for each District and all of them function under the direct control of respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 framed different sets of rules governing the service conditions of the Corporation on the one hand and the Societies on the other in Annexures 1 and 2 respectively. It functions at State level. The Backward Classes Cooperative Societies are established for each District and all of them function under the direct control of respondent No.1. Respondent No.1 framed different sets of rules governing the service conditions of the Corporation on the one hand and the Societies on the other in Annexures 1 and 2 respectively. The post of Manager (Finance) occurs at Serial No.3 in Annexure-I. It reads as under: Manager (i) Must possess Graduation Board 16950-14425 (Finance) / (a) By Promotion degree. Accounts from Superintendents/ (ii) Must put in 5 years of Officer A.M (Finance) of satisfactory service in lower Corporation cadre/2 years in case of Asst. (b) By deputation Accounts Officer & Asst. from officers of Development Officer. Government having (iii) Must pass the HDC/JDC equivalent scale of test. pay & as revised by (iv) Availability of clear government from vacancy. time to time (v) Good knowledge of computer applications suitable to the nature of job/ requirements. (vi) Board is competent to relax the above qualification in deserving cases, on case by case basis. 6. The provision does not stipulate that a Superintendent/Assistant Manager (Finance) of the Corporation must pass accounts test. It is only in the Rules pertaining to the employees of the societies framed in Annexure-II for the post of Executive Director that the accounts test is stipulated. Drawing analogy from the Rule that is applicable to the post of Executive Director in the Societies as provided for under Annexure-II, the respondents insisted that a candidate must pass the accounts test to be eligible to be promoted to the post of Manager (Finance) also, on the ground that it is equivalent to the post of Executive Director of a Society. 7. It is also urged that at the end of the Rules contained in Annexure-II, general stipulations as to pass in accounts test are made for the post of Executive Directors and that they apply for promotion to the post of Manager (Finance) of the Corporation also. 8. When the rulemaking authority maintained a clear dichotomy between the employees of the Corporation on the one hand and those of the Societies on the other and had framed different sets of rules, there was absolutely no justification in respondent No.1 in applying the Rules of one organization to the employees of the other. 9. 8. When the rulemaking authority maintained a clear dichotomy between the employees of the Corporation on the one hand and those of the Societies on the other and had framed different sets of rules, there was absolutely no justification in respondent No.1 in applying the Rules of one organization to the employees of the other. 9. The plea of the petitioner that though the incumbent who retired from the Office of Manager (Finance) recently did not pass the accounts test; nor possessed the degree qualification, was promoted; is not at all rebutted. The denial of promotion to the petitioner appears to be the result of conferring benefit upon one Sri Rajender by the Government enabling him to be shifted from Nalgonda to Hyderabad. That necessitated creation of a vacancy and respondent No.3 was made to leave the post of Executive Director of the Society and was accommodated in the post of Manager (Finance) of the Corporation. The whole exercise is arbitrary and untenable. 10. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. Respondent No.1 is directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Manager (Finance) without treating him as disqualified on the ground that he did not pass accounts test. This exercise shall be completed within six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.