ORDER : This Writ Petition is filed, seeking the following relief: “…..to issue a Writ, Order or direction, to call for the records relating to Memo No. SO.I(I)/DEE-IV/RWS and S/12335/2016, dated 29.12.2016 and consequential proceedings No. S.O.I (IV)/DEE-IV/RWS and S/12335/2015, dated 03.03.2017 reverting the petitioner issued by the 3rd respondent and set aside the same as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unreasonable and contrary to principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to place the petitioner above Sl.No.49 and continuing him as Deputy Executive and pass such other orders.” 2. Heard Mr. M. Ratna Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader, Services-II for the respondents. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner while working in Panchayat Raj Department in Zone-IV, vide G.O.Ms.No.14, dated 03.01.2011 was appointed by transfer to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, Zone-IV in Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Department in terms of Rule 3 of A.P. Rural Water Supply Engineering Services-2008 giving last rank in the seniority list of regular Assistant Executive Engineer, Zone-IV subject to the eligibility and that the petitioner shall forego his lien in Panchayat Raj Department, since there is no provision for departmental transfer therein. The petitioner passed Accounts Test for PWD Officers and Subordinates vide letter dated 15.03.1999 and his services was regularized in the care of AEEs vide proceedings dated 16.05.2009, wherein the name of the petitioner is shown in commencing his probation from 24.11.2014. While the matter stood thus, the respondents without following the rules, the seniority list prepared four years back is now sought to be reviewed in the name of tentative provisional seniority list affecting the petitioner’s seniority and placed him at Sl.No.74 below his juniors, who were not even eligible to be promoted as on 13.09.2013, the date on which the petitioner is promoted. The petitioner submitted objections, but without considering the same, the 3rd respondent issued proceedings dated 03.03.2017, wherein the name of the petitioner is shown at Sl.No.48 along with others. Based on the said tentative seniority list, Ad-hoc promotion was given to the individual from Assistant Executive Engineer to Deputy Executive Engineer. The 2nd respondent issued show-cause notice dated 29.12.2016 showing as to why the services of DEE has not been reverted from the cadre. Based on the said tentative seniority list, Ad-hoc promotion was given to the individual from Assistant Executive Engineer to Deputy Executive Engineer. The 2nd respondent issued show-cause notice dated 29.12.2016 showing as to why the services of DEE has not been reverted from the cadre. The petitioner made representation to the 2nd respondent requesting him not to revert to the post of AEE from the cadre of DEE, but without considering his request the 2nd respondent issued proceedings to revert the petitioner to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer from Deputy Executive Engineer, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence the writ petition came to be filed. 4. Per contra, the respondents filed counter-affidavit denying all material averments made in the affidavit and mainly contended that as per tentative provisional seniority list dated 14.09.2011 the name of the petitioner shown at Sl.No.48. Basing on the said list the petitioner got promotion as Deputy Executive Engineer purely on adhoc basis as per his seniority, subject to outcome of any judgments pending against the above seniority and liable for reversion at any time without any notice to the individual. It is further contended that another revised tentative seniority list was prepared by duly incorporating the Assistant Executive Engineers, who were appointed during the year 2010-2011, duly following the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 under Rule 33(b). Accordingly the name of the petitioner was shown after the public service commission candidates appointed during the year 2010 and their date of probation was commenced with effect from 07.01.2011 and whereas the petitioner’s date of probation is 13.01.2011, which is behind the 2010 APPSC Batch. As such the name of the petitioner is shown at Sl.No.74. Basing on the above provisions, the 1st respondent issued reversion orders to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer from Deputy Executive Engineer to the individual in accordance with rules. Hence the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. As could be seen from the tentative Seniority list dated 01.02.2016 the name of the petitioner is shown at Sl.No.74, who appointed by transfer from P.R. Department as per G.O.Ms.No.14, dated 13.01.2011 with a condition to assigning rank below the last regular AEE of Zone-IV. Hence the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. As could be seen from the tentative Seniority list dated 01.02.2016 the name of the petitioner is shown at Sl.No.74, who appointed by transfer from P.R. Department as per G.O.Ms.No.14, dated 13.01.2011 with a condition to assigning rank below the last regular AEE of Zone-IV. Further the 3rd respondent issued proceedings dated 03.03.2017 to revert the petitioner from Deputy Executive Engineer to Assistant Executive Engineer on the ground that the seniors to the petitioner are yet to be promoted to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer without considering the objections of the petitioner. However, as could be seen from the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 30.09.2013 duly informed that his promotion/ appointment by transfer as Deputy Executive Engineer (RWS &S) is purely on Adhoc basis and subject to the following conditions viz., a) This Adhoc Promotion is subject to revision of Seniority at a later date as per Rule 16(h) of A.P. State & Sub-Ordinate Service Rules, 1996 or as decided by the Government from time to time. b) This Adhoc Promotion is subject to review on account of preparation of Year-wise Panels. Further, the said Adhoc promotion is reversion at any time without notice and without assigning any reasons. Therefore it is purely a temporary measure, it does not confer any right whatsoever for claiming regular promotion as Deputy Executive Engineer, (RWS & S). 6. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner points that the respondents placed the name of the petitioner in different serial numbers named as tentative seniority list and revised seniority list which is disputed as it was prepared for their convenience sake. Basing on the said seniority list, the juniors of the petitioner got promotions, which is illegal and arbitrary. Therefore inaction of the respondents is questioned in this writ petition. 7. Basing on the said seniority list, the juniors of the petitioner got promotions, which is illegal and arbitrary. Therefore inaction of the respondents is questioned in this writ petition. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, upon perusal of the material on record and considering the submissions of the both the counsel, this Court inclined to dispose of the writ petition, with a direction to the respondents to consider the objections raised by the petitioner against the show-cause notice issued by the respondents and fix the exact seniority of the petitioner and if he is eligible, consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer or else pass appropriate reasoned order in accordance with law, within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.