ORDER : K. Manmadha Rao, J. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “….to issue a Writ Order Or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the respondents in not considering the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer ignoring the seniority of the petitioners many juniors were promoted on 4.6.2021 contrary to the existing seniority list dated 17.6.2019 issued by the 2ndrespondent in the absence of any disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and did not considering the seniority of the petitioners is highly illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory in violation of principal of natural justice consequently direct the respondents herein to consider the candidature of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer in the 4 existing vacancies in the present promotional Committee meeting which scheduled to be held before 23.7.2021 in the interest of justice and pass….” 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that initially they were appointed as Assistant Executive Engineers, through employment exchange, and subsequently they were regularized vide G.O.Ms.No.16 T(R&B) (Ser.III) Department, dated 16.12.2002. Later, the 1st petitioner went on deputation to APTDC and worked as Dy. ?.?. vide proceedings dated 21.6.2019. Thereafter, repatriated to R&B Department as AEE and due for promotion to the post of Dy. E.E. and no charge memo is pending against him as on today. It is the main grievance of the petitioners that Seniority List was issued by the 2nd respondent in the category of AEEs as per the said list, both the petitioners are came the zone of consideration for promotion. Further, the petitioners’ juniors were considered for promotion as Dy. E.E by ignoring the seniority of the petitioners, as well as the existing seniority. Therefore the petitioners filed the present writ petition. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents denying the allegations made in the petition. It is stated that the Government vide GO.Ms.No.82 T, R&B dated 25.2.2009 have issued an amendment to G.O.Ms.No.103 T, R&B Department, dated 22.5.1996, duly incorporating a proviso under Rule 3. Accordingly the panels for AEEs/AEs/D.Man fit for temporary promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Dy.E.Es (R&B) Zone.I for the panel years 2010-2011 to 2012-2013 were approved. It is stated that the Government vide GO.Ms.No.82 T, R&B dated 25.2.2009 have issued an amendment to G.O.Ms.No.103 T, R&B Department, dated 22.5.1996, duly incorporating a proviso under Rule 3. Accordingly the panels for AEEs/AEs/D.Man fit for temporary promotion/appointment by transfer to the post of Dy.E.Es (R&B) Zone.I for the panel years 2010-2011 to 2012-2013 were approved. Subsequently, the Government in accordance with the judgments of APAT, have issued orders duly omitting the above provisos retrospectively with effect from 25.02.2009 vide G.O. Ms.No.67, TR&B dt.21.12.2018. As such, the earlier panels, which were approved while implementing the orders of impugned G.O. Ms. No.82 dated 25-02-2009 i.e., 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 in Zone.I are liable to be reviewed in terms of G.O. Ms No.67 dated 21.12.2018. It is further stated that, the panel years 2013-14 to 2020-21 were not conducted for the post of DEEs for want of amendments to the (R&B) Engineering Service Rules. Now, after issuance of amendments to (R&B) Engineering Service Rules vide G.O.Ms No.67 dated 21.12.2018, a necessity has arisen to review the panels for the years 2010-2011 to 2012-2013 and to conduct fresh panels of DEEs from 2013-14 to 2020-21 and accordingly, the Government was requested to issue permission for revision of earlier panels as well as for fresh panels. However, keeping in view of the time to be taken for getting requisite orders from the Govt., to the above extent and also keeping in view of the exigencies of services in the cadre of DEE in all Zones, the Government was requested to give necessary permission for placing certain AEEs / AEs and Draughtsman Grade-I employees in all Zones as in-charge DEEs, till receipt of requisite orders from the Government to the above effect. It is further stated that, the Government T(R&B) Dept, vide Memo No. RDBSOSERR (SER)/3/ 2021-SERVICES-RB, dated 20.04.2021 have accorded permission to the 2nd Respondent to take up in- charge arrangements to the vacant posts of DEEs available as on date duly following the relevant rules. It is further stated that, the Government T(R&B) Dept, vide Memo No. RDBSOSERR (SER)/3/ 2021-SERVICES-RB, dated 20.04.2021 have accorded permission to the 2nd Respondent to take up in- charge arrangements to the vacant posts of DEEs available as on date duly following the relevant rules. Accordingly while reviewing the earlier panels of DEEs i.e., 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 in accordance with amended Service Rules and also preparing fresh panels from 2013-14 to 2020-21 in accordance with above Rules, a list of eligible AEEs / AEs & DM Gr-I was prepared in year-wise and the AEEs / AEs / DM Gr-I whoever came for inclusion of their names as DEEs were, alone considered for making in-charge DEEs and accordingly orders were issued by this office in June'2021. In this connection, it is pertinent to mention that due to revision of earlier panels in terms of amended Service Rules, the AEEs who were earlier considered for inclusion against the slots meant for AEs were displaced in accordance with rules. 4. Heard Sri K. Ramalingeswara Rao, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services- II appearing for the respondents. 5. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners while reiterating the averments made in the petition, contended that, as on today, there are (4) Deputy Executive Engineer posts fall on vacant, due to the retirement of candidates on 30-6-2021 one post, and 31-5-2021, one post, and one post in Tekkali (R&B) Division, and one post at Parvathipuram (R&B) Division in the State, respectively all these posts are vacant, but the respondents herein again contemplating to fill up these vacancies, before 23-7-2021. Therefore, being the senior most Assistant Executive Engineer in the State, the 1st petitioner made to work under his juniors as AEE, and it is a causing much unexplained humiliation without any fault on his side. Leaned counsel further submits that, in the ensuing counseling also the 1st petitioner’s candidature cannot be ignored, as there are no disciplinary proceedings pending against him as of now. At the same time the 2nd petitioner is also fully eligible, and no disciplinary proceedings are pending against him as of now. In such circumstances, learned counsel requests this Court to issue a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. 6. At the same time the 2nd petitioner is also fully eligible, and no disciplinary proceedings are pending against him as of now. In such circumstances, learned counsel requests this Court to issue a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders. 6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader also reiterated the contents made in the counter affidavit. While denying the contents made by the petitioners, stated that, while preparing fresh panels of DEEs from 2013-14 to 2020-21, the mandated 24 Cycle prescribed under Note-I of Rule-3 was strictly followed. It is pertinent to mention here that in the proposed panel of DEEs for the year 2020-21, in Zone.I the last AEE considered for inclusion is Sri N. Dhana Raju at Serial No.96 of seniority list of AEEs precipitated vide Circular Memo No.18693/Ser.III(1)/2019, dated 17.06.2019, which was alluded by the petitioners. Since, the 1st petitioner is at Sl.No.102 and the 2nd petitioner is at Sl.No.110 respectively, their turn is yet to come for inclusion, as per the available vacancies in Zone-I. It is further stated that the services of the petitioners as well as the next promotional post i.e., DEE (R&B) are covered under (R&B) Engineering Service Rules'1996 issued vide GO Ms No.103 T(R&B) (S.II) Dept, dated 22.05.1996. Further, under above Service Rules, the vacancies in the cadre of DEE are to be filled up by way of promotion or appointment by transfer in terms of a 24 cycle prescribed in Note-I under Rule-3 "Method of Appointment". Out of 24 Cycle points, 18 Cycle points considered with AEEs (Graduate Engineers) and 6 Cycle points considered with AEs/Draughtsman Gade.I (non- graduate Engineers). Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that, in so far as the claim of the petitioners, their junior i.e., Sri M.L.V. Sagar, A?.?., was considered as I/c DEE is concerned, as already explained supra, comparison of seniority of Petitioners vis-à-vis an Assistant Engineers is quite illegal. Further having been known to the (R&B) Engineering Service Rules and in particularly the Note-I under Rule-3 of above Rules, the petitioners are merely misrepresenting to this Court. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that the particulars with regard to upcoming 4 vacancies in Zone-I as well as an apprehension that the promotional committee meeting which was said to be scheduled on 23.07.2021, are merely misapprehensions of the petitioners and a far from truth. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that the particulars with regard to upcoming 4 vacancies in Zone-I as well as an apprehension that the promotional committee meeting which was said to be scheduled on 23.07.2021, are merely misapprehensions of the petitioners and a far from truth. As on the date, in Zone.I there is one clear vacancy "(R&B) Sub Division, Tekkali" and posting orders against another vacancy at "PA to Executive Engineer, Division, Parvathipuram" pending with Government. Furthermore, repatriation orders were issued by the A.P.S.S.A., in respect of Sri R.RaviSekhar, who stands at Sl No.25 (senior to both petitioners) and he is yet to be relieved from the A.P.S.S.A. from deputation. In view of the above circumstances, the claim of the petitioners are devoid of merits, as none of their juniors in the category of AEE were considered for I/c DEEs during June 2021 and more the petitioners are comparing their seniority with that of AEs which is factually incorrect as the respondents are preparing/maintaining 3:1 ratio between AEEs/AEs/Draughtsman Grade.I and also preparing separate seniority lists, and hence the contentions raised by the petitioners are devoid of merits. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 7. Perused the material on record. 8. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that, the 2nd respondent without following the existing seniority list dated 17.6.2019 has considered and promoted as Dy.EEs the candidates who were joined in the year 2012 as AEEs, the candidates much juniors to the petitioners were got promoted. It is also the contention of the petitioners that the Government vide Memo dated 20.4.2021 has accorded permission to the 2nd respondent herein to take up In-charge arrangements to the vacant post of Dy.EEs in relaxation of Rule 10(h) of AP. State & Subordinate Service Rules, 1996. The respondents, by adopting the method of In-charge arrangements, in filling up the clear vacancies of DEEs Posts, totally ignoring the SAEE, without following the existing seniority list dated 17.6.2019, even for considering the incharge arrangement, to the higher posts, bypassing the seniority, is unwarranted and highly illegal and arbitrary. 9. State & Subordinate Service Rules, 1996. The respondents, by adopting the method of In-charge arrangements, in filling up the clear vacancies of DEEs Posts, totally ignoring the SAEE, without following the existing seniority list dated 17.6.2019, even for considering the incharge arrangement, to the higher posts, bypassing the seniority, is unwarranted and highly illegal and arbitrary. 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and on considering the submissions of both the learned counsels, this Court is inclined to dispose of the present writ petition while declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the candidature of the petitioners for promotion, as illegal and arbitrary. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Deputy Executive Engineer in the (4) existing vacancies in the present promotional Committee meeting which was held on 23.7.2021,by following the existing seniority list dated 17.6.2019. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.