- (1.) The short question for consideration in this Writ petition is whether the petitioners, who have been promoted as Upper Division Clerks nearly four years prior to the impugned order of reversion, can be reverted so as to make room for certain others who had been quite properly passed over at the earlier stage.
(2.) The facts are that the petitioners,who were appointed at the first instance as Lower Division Clerks, had been promoted as Upper Division Clerks, in the Industries Department of the Government of Andhra Pradesh. They passed the relevant tests and qualified themselves for promotion as Upper Division Clerks. In view of the qualifications they were promoted ignoring the seniority of certain persons, who did not acquire the necessary qualification. The position on the date of the promotion of the petitioners was that they alone were eligible for promotion whereas their seniors were not.
(3.) Nearly four years later, the petitioners are sought to be reverted on the ground that certain persons, who were their seniors in the cadre of Lower Division Clerks, have subsequently acquired the qualification necessary for promotion. I do not think that the action of the Government can be upheld as just or can be said to be in consonance with the canons of fair play. In circumstances which are analogous to the case on hand, the view taken by Justice Vaidya, lends support to the contention urged on behalf of the petitioners. Dealing with facts which are similar, Vaidya, J., repelled the contention urged on behalf of the Government that their action was in accord with the principles of natural justice. The learned Judge said : "It is a very laudable principle that when other things are equal, senior persons must get the first chance for promotion. But this principle has to be applied at the time when promotions or appointments are made and the persons eligible at that time have to be taken into consideration and selection made from them according to merit, ability and seniority.";