ORDER : The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…issue an appropriate Writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring action of the respondents in placing the petitioner at Sl.No.115 in the seniority list of Typists communicated through proceedings in Rc.No.04/2017/A2, dated 07.06.2019 issued by the 3rd respondent by reckoning his seniority from 20.10.2017 instead of date of his appointment by transfer as Typist i.e., 28.12.2003 and the action of the respondent No.2 in issuing the proceedings in Rc.No.281204/CPR&RD/C2/2020, dated 15.09.2021 rejecting the appeal of the petitioner as wholly illegal, arbitrary, without application of mind and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently declare that the petitioner is entitled to count his seniority in the category of Typist from the date of his initial appointment i.e., 28.12.2003 and on that basis consider him for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant by including his name in the panel list of eligible candidates for promotion to the post of Senior Assistant for the panel year 2020-21 prepared on 28.08.2021 and pass such other and further order or orders as the Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that petitioner was temporarily appointed as attender, on compassionate grounds, vide proceedings Rc.No.2691/97/A1, dated 15.04.1998 in Panchayat Raj Division, Madugula, Visakhapatnam District. Petitioner joined duty on 19.05.1998. The petitioner’s services were regularized with effect from 19.05.1998 and his probation was declared on 18.05.2000 in the cadre of attender. The petitioner was promoted as Typist vide proceedings Rc.No.584 (1-Ty)/2003/A2, dated 26.12.2003 of CEO, ZPP, Visakhapatnam. Pursuant to the proceedings referred supra, the petitioner joined as Typist. (a) The petitioner possessed Intermediate and technical qualification of Typewriting (English) Higher Grade and Typewriting (Telugu) Lower Grade as on the date of his appointment by transfer as Typist. Petitioner’s services were regularized with effect from the Forenoon of 28.12.2003 and probation was declared with effect from afternoon of 27.12.2004. Petitioner was also given special grade scale on completion of six years in the cadre of Typist with effect from 01.12.2010 vide proceedings in D.Dis.No.380/2012/A2, dated 09.03.2012. Petitioner’s services were regularized with effect from the Forenoon of 28.12.2003 and probation was declared with effect from afternoon of 27.12.2004. Petitioner was also given special grade scale on completion of six years in the cadre of Typist with effect from 01.12.2010 vide proceedings in D.Dis.No.380/2012/A2, dated 09.03.2012. (b) As the matter stood thus, respondent No.3 issued memo Rc.No.604/2012/A2, dated 29.02.2016 and directed the petitioner to submit Xerox copies of his General and Technical qualifications within three (3) days. Another memo vide memo Rc.No.604/2012/A2, dated 16.05.2018 was issued by respondent No.3 to submit Xerox copies of General and Technical qualifications. Petitioner, in obedience to memos, submitted the Xerox copies on 26.05.2018. In fact, according to the petitioner, he submitted his certificates in the office of Zilla Parishad, Visakhapatnam and got acknowledgement on prior occasion. (c) Respondent No.3 prepared provisional seniority list of Typists. While preparing the provisional seniority list, objections were called for and petitioner submitted his objections. Final seniority list was prepared vide Rc.No.04/ 2017/A2, dated 07.06.2019, wherein, the petitioner was placed at Sl.No.33 and in Rank No.115. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed appeal before the Commissioner/respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 issued proceedings No.1281204/ CPR&RD/C2/2020, dated 15.09.2021 rejecting the claim of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, above writ petition is filed. 3. Counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 and 3. In the counter affidavit, respondent No.2 contended that under Rule 10(a) of A.P Subordinate Service Rules and as per A.P. Ministerial Service Rules, 1998 and amendments thereon, the petitioner was promoted as Typist vide proceedings Rc.No.581(1-Ty)2003/A2, dated 26.12.2003. Petitioner joined duty on 28.12.2003 as Typist. Petitioner should have obtained requisite qualification within the period of probation. The CEO, ZPP, Visakhapatnam should have reverted him as attender for his failure to acquire qualification. The services of petitioner were regularized with effect from 28.12.2003 and the probation period was declared on 27.12.2004 in the cadres of Typist vide proceedings Rc.No.1303/2009/A2/dated 06.06.2009. Later, SGP scale on completion of six (6) years service was also sanctioned on 09.03.2012 with effect from 01.02.2010. Pursuant to the notice, petitioner submitted General and Technical qualification certificates on 26.05.2018. After verification of the certificates, it was noticed that the petitioner was passed Typewriting Telugu Higher Grade on 20.10.2017. The requisite qualification for Typist is Typewriting Higher Grade in Telugu. Pursuant to the notice, petitioner submitted General and Technical qualification certificates on 26.05.2018. After verification of the certificates, it was noticed that the petitioner was passed Typewriting Telugu Higher Grade on 20.10.2017. The requisite qualification for Typist is Typewriting Higher Grade in Telugu. (a) Provisional seniority list was prepared in the cadre of typists and the same was communicated vide Rc.No4/2017/A2, dated 01.09.2018 of CEO, ZPP, Visakhapatnam and called for objections. Petitioner’s name was shown at rank no 115, however, petitioner requested to place his name at Rank No.89 in the provisional seniority list as per the date of his joining in the cadre of Typist. (b) One L.A.S.S.Prasada Rao and D.Seshagiri Rao, Typists are requested to consider their cases for regularization from the date of completion of five years service in the feeder category of attender by quoting the petitioner as an example. The Government issued amendment to G.O.Ms.No.60, G.A.(Ser.A) Department, dated 11.12.1997 and reviewed appointments of persons appointed on compassionate grounds subject to their requisite qualifications. Petitioner has taken advantage of not mentioning of the conditions required under Annexure-I of Rule 6(1) of Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Service Rules, 1998. The services of petitioner in the cadre of Typist shall be counted with effect from 20.10.2017 on the date of petitioner acquiring qualification and eventually, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 4. Respondent No.3 filed separate counter and reiterated the contentions of Respondent No.2. 5. Heard Sri Kirthi Teja Kondaveeti, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri G. Srinivasula Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for ZPP, MPP & Grama Panchayat appearing for Respondent No.3 and learned Government Pleader for Services- IV appearing for respondents Nos. 1 and 2. 6. Counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the averments in the writ affidavit would further contend that petitioner was appointed as typist made under Annexure-1 Class-B of Category-4(iii) and Typewriting higher in Telugu is not necessary. He would also contend that even in the appointment letter no rider was mentioned that the petitioner should acquire Higher Grade Telugu Typewriting. In fact petitioner’s probation was also declared. Petitioner also granted Special Grade Pay on completion of six years. Re-fixing of seniority list after lapse of 15 years is illegal and arbitrary. 7. He would also contend that even in the appointment letter no rider was mentioned that the petitioner should acquire Higher Grade Telugu Typewriting. In fact petitioner’s probation was also declared. Petitioner also granted Special Grade Pay on completion of six years. Re-fixing of seniority list after lapse of 15 years is illegal and arbitrary. 7. Learned Standing Counsel and learned Government Pleader on the other hand would contend that as per Annexure-1 Class-B Category-4 (ii), one must have passed Government Technical Examination in Typewriting Higher Grade in Telugu on a Government Standard Key Board to the post of Typist in the offices of Head quarters of Department and Directorates. Petitioner possessed qualification of Typewriting (Telugu) lower grade on the date of his appointment. Though, it was not mentioned in the appointment letter regarding the qualification, petitioner cannot take advantage of non-mentioning of requisite qualification. Considering the objections submitted by petitioner, final seniority list was prepared, and petitioner was shown at Sl.No.33 with Rank No.115. They also would contend that there is no merit in the writ petition and hence, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 8. The point for consideration is: Whether the service of the petitioner, in cadre of typist, is to be reckoned from 28.12.2003 or from 20.10.2017 qua seniority? 9. Facts, undisputed, as per the record, are that petitioner was temporarily appointed as attender on compassionate grounds on 15.04.1998. His services were regularized with effect from 19.05.1998 and probation was declared on 27.12.2004 in the cadre of attender. Petitioner was promoted as Typist from the feeder category of attender on 26.12.2003. Petitioner joined duty on 28.12.2003 and, his services were regularized as Typist with effect from 28.12.2003. Probation was declared with effect from 27.12.2004. Petitioner was also granted special grade scale vide proceedings dated 09.03.2012 with effect from 01.12.2010 on completion of six years. 10. As the matter stood thus, Memo dated 29.02.2016 was issued to the petitioner by Respondent No.3 to submit Xerox copies of General and Technical qualifications. Later, another memo dated 16.05.2018 was issued by Respondent No.3 directing the petitioner to submit his certificates. Petitioner submitted requisite certificates on 26.05.2018 and the provisional seniority list dated 01.09.2018 was prepared. Petitioner submitted objections regarding provisional seniority list. Final seniority list was prepared on 07.06.2019 and petitioner’s name was shown at Sl.No.33 with Rank No.115. Later, another memo dated 16.05.2018 was issued by Respondent No.3 directing the petitioner to submit his certificates. Petitioner submitted requisite certificates on 26.05.2018 and the provisional seniority list dated 01.09.2018 was prepared. Petitioner submitted objections regarding provisional seniority list. Final seniority list was prepared on 07.06.2019 and petitioner’s name was shown at Sl.No.33 with Rank No.115. The date of joining in the post of Typist is shown as 28.12.2003/20.10.2017. An Appeal filed by the petitioner against the State, was dismissed by the Appellate authority on 15.09.2021. 11. Annexure-I of Ministerial Services Rules, 1998 prescribes Class, Category, method of recruitment and qualifications. Annexure-I is in consonance with Rule-6 of Ministerial Services Rules, 1998. Class (B) Category (IV) of Annexure-I of Ministerial services Rules, 1998 which is relevant is extracted hereunder: Ministerial Service Rules, 1998: Annexure-I 4. Typist in the Offices Of Heads of Depts. And Directorates By direct Recruitment or by transfer * [(i)] Must hold a Bachelor’s Degree of any University in India established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, State Act or Provincial Act or an Institution recognized by the University Grants Commission or any equivalent qualification.] * [Sub. By G.O.Ms.No.135, G.A. (Ser.B) Dept., Dt.12-05-2014] (ii) Must have passed the Govt. Technical Examination in Typewriting by the Higher Grade in Telugu on a Government Standard Key Board. iii) Provided that if persons with the qualification prescribed in item (ii) above are not available candidates who have passed the above examination in Typewriting by Lower Grade may if otherwise qualified be appointed. (iv) Provided further that candidates who possess Typewriting Qualification in English by Lower Grade besides the qualifications mentioned in items (ii) and (iii) above shall be given preference for appointment by direct recruitment. 12. A perusal of Category (4) would disclose that to the post of Typist in the office of Heads of Departments and Directorates, one should possess Intermediate qualification and also should possess Typewriting Higher Grade in Telugu on a Government standard keyboard. However, column (iii) of Category IV which is relevant would manifest that “if persons with the qualification prescribed in item (ii) above are not available candidates who have passed the above examination in typewriting by Lower Grade if otherwise qualified be appointed”. 13. Thus, in column (ii) it was mentioned that to be appointed as typist in the offices of Heads of Depts. 13. Thus, in column (ii) it was mentioned that to be appointed as typist in the offices of Heads of Depts. And Directorates one should possess type writing by the higher grade in Telugu on a government standard key board. If person with such qualification is not available, such a situation was dealt in column (iii). Column (iv) deals with preference. 14. Petitioner, by the date of his appointment as typist, is qualified in Telugu Typewriting Lower Grade and possessed Intermediate qualification. Thus, petitioner satisfied category 4 column (iii). If any other person possessing Telugu higher type writing is available, petitioner’s case would not have been considered for typist. Since the petitioner is qualified, he was promoted as Typist vide proceedings dated 26.12.2003. 15. It is pertinent to mention here that even in the order nothing was mentioned i.e. subject to petitioner passing Telugu type writing higher. The proceedings dated 26.12.2003 would indicate that the promotion is purely temporary subject to following conditions. a) Subject to outcome of Court cases if any pending in the Hon’ble Judiciary like High Court/A.P. Administrative Tribunal/Lok-Ayuktha. b) Subject to receipt of instructions from the Commissioner of Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment on the appeals of certain Junior Assistants for restoration of their seniority I their respective feeder categories. c) Subject to the results of disciplinary cases if any pending against them. d) Subject to liable for cancellation or reversion if any exigency arises and without assigning reasons therefor and it will not confer any right or claim for regularization of further appointment; and e) subject to finalization of seniority in the feeder category. 16. The conditions extracted supra do not indicate that the promotion is subject to petitioner’s possessing Typewriting Telugu Higher Grade. Incidentally, petitioner also acquired higher grade in Telugu Typewriting in the year 2017. It is not out of place to mention here that pursuant to the petitioner’s promotion as Typist, his probation was declared, and he was also granted special grade increment on completion of six years in the post of Typist. 17. Rule 33 of State and Sub-ordinate Service Rules, 1996 deals with seniority. The seniority of a person in a service, Class, category or grade, shall, unless he had been reduced to a lower rank as a punishment, be determined by the date of his first appointment to such service, class, category or grade. 18. 17. Rule 33 of State and Sub-ordinate Service Rules, 1996 deals with seniority. The seniority of a person in a service, Class, category or grade, shall, unless he had been reduced to a lower rank as a punishment, be determined by the date of his first appointment to such service, class, category or grade. 18. In the case on hand, petitioner was appointed as Typist vide proceedings dated 26.12.2003 and he joined duty on 28.12.2003. Thus, the seniority of the petitioner is to be reckoned from 28.12.2003. However, reckoning the seniority of the petitioner from 20-10-2017 instead of 28-12-2003 is not only arbitrary but also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 19. G.O.Ms.No.151, General Administration (SER.G) Department, dated 22.06.2004, relied upon by the counsel for the respondents, has no application to the case on hand. It deals with a case where initial appointment on compassionate grounds and is subject to acquiring qualification. In the case on hand, petitioner was initially appointed as attender and he satisfied requisite qualifications and his probation was also regularized as attender. On completion of five years of service, petitioner was promoted by transfer as Typist. 20. The Appellate authority/Respondent No.2 failed to consider Class-B, Category-4(iii) of Annexure-1 and dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner on a wrong premise. 2nd respondent being the appellate authority should have considered the case keeping in view of the Annexure-I. Appellate authority has to arrive at the conclusions after assessing the material available on record independently. However, as seen from the proceedings, appellate authority simply confirmed the order of CEO without assessing the material and legal aspects. Appellate authority did not consider column (iii) of Category IV. In fact, as observed supra, petitioner’s appointment as typist should be treated as one under column(iii) of category of IV Class-B of Annexure-I. Thus, the seniority of the petitioner should have been reckoned from 28-12-2003 and petitioner should be placed in the seniority list accordingly. 21. In view of the discussion referred supra, this court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner’s service in the cadre of typist is to be reckoned from the date of his joining into service as Typist i.e., 28.12.2003. The proceedings Rc.No.281204/CPR&RD/C2/ 2020, dated 15.09.2021 are hereby set aside. Respondent No.2 shall reckon the seniority of the petitioner from the date of 28.12.2003 and fix his seniority in the list accordingly. 22. The proceedings Rc.No.281204/CPR&RD/C2/ 2020, dated 15.09.2021 are hereby set aside. Respondent No.2 shall reckon the seniority of the petitioner from the date of 28.12.2003 and fix his seniority in the list accordingly. 22. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.