(Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to to issue a Writ or Order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings R.C.No.02/Promotions /DON/2017 dated 20/03/2018 issued by the Respondent No.4 and posting of Respondent No.6 in Holy Cross Girls High School, Nandyal as being illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the posting of Respondent No.6 as School Assistant in Holy Cross Girls High School Nandyal and be pleased to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to forthwith direct the Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 to suspend the posting of Respondent No.6 as School Assistant in Holy Cross Girls High School Nandyal pending disposal of the Writ petition and be pleased to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased To suspend the proceedings vide Rc.No.3386/B2/2018 dated 28-2-2019 issued by respondent no.2 and pleased to pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to permit the petitioner herein to implead the proposed respondent namely J.V.Manajari Wood, as Respondent No.7 in the present Writ Petition in the interest of justice and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to review to set aside the order made on 07-07-2023 in WP no. 10271 of 2018 and restore the Writ Petition for consideration on merits in the interest of justice and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased go direct the respondents 1 to 3 and 5, to consider the representation dt 12.10.2017, made by the petitioner for effecting promotion and posting the petitioner at Holy Cross Girls School at Nandyal, pending disposal of the present Writ Petition and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the proceedings R C No 02/Promotions /DON/2017 dated 20/03/2018 issued by the Respondent No 4 and posting of Respondent No 6 in Holy Cross Girls High School Nandyal as being illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the posting of Respondent No 6 as School Assistant in Holy Cross Girls High School Nandyal and pass such order or orders as this Honble Court deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of this case. New Prayer as Follows Therefore it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to permit the petitioners herein to amend the Prayer in the affidavit in Writ Petition and Memorandum of Writ Petition as follows: Therefore it is prayed that this Honble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus i. declaring the Impugned action of 4th respondent in issuing impugned proceedings Rc.No.02/Promotions/DC>N/2017, dt 20.03.2018, making allotment and posting against the petitioner on promotion as School Assistant(Science) at a far off place i.e. 80kms away from Nandhyal and posting the petitioner at CSl High School Nandikotkur, though petitioner is entitled to be posted as per her option at SPG U.P School at Govindapalle, a; well as Holy Cross Girls High School at Nandhyal, while favouring Juniors to the petitioner i.e. respondents 6 and 7, to be accommodated at Nandhyal only as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, ii. further action of the respondents in not giving effect to the promotion of the petitioner to the post of School Assistant(Science), though petitioner has to be posted as School Assistant(Science) at Nandhyal, thereby denying promotion and salary of the petitioner in the promoted post as illegal, arbitrary. violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, iii. consequently direct the respondents to give effect to the promotion of the petitioner to the post of School Assistant(Science) as per the proceedings Rc.No.4166/B2/2017, dt 14.03.2018, issued by the 3rd respondent, i.e. Regional Joint Director, Kadapa, with notional benefits from the date of said proceedings dt 14.03.2018 with all consequential benefits in the interest of Justice and pass)

1. This Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayer:

                  “…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus

                  i. declaring the Impugned action of 4th respondent in issuing impugned proceedings Rc.No.02/Promotions/DC>N/2017, dt 20.03.2018, making allotment and posting against the petitioner on promotion as School Assistant(Science) at a far off place i.e. 80kms away from Nandhyal and posting the petitioner at CSl High School Nandikotkur, though petitioner is entitled to be posted as per her option at SPG U.P School at Govindapalle, a; well as Holy Cross Girls High School at Nandhyal, while favouring Juniors to the petitioner i.e. respondents 6 and 7, to be accommodated at Nandhyal only as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, ii. further action of the respondents in not giving effect to the promotion of the petitioner to the post of School Assistant(Science), though petitioner has to be posted as School Assistant(Science) at Nandhyal, thereby denying promotion and salary of the petitioner in the promoted post as illegal, arbitrary. violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, iii. consequently direct the respondents to give effect to the promotion of the petitioner to the post of School Assistant(Science) as per the proceedings Rc.No.4166/B2/2017, dt 14.03.2018, issued by the 3rd respondent, i.e. Regional Joint Director, Kadapa, with notional benefits from the date of said proceedings dt 14.03.2018 with all consequential benefits in the interest of Justice and pass…”

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she possesses B.Sc. and B.Ed. qualifications and was appointed as a secondary grade teacher on 07.09.1995 at S.P.G. Upper Primary School, Govindapalle, and that she has been working as secondary grade teacher at S.P.G. Model Primary School, Nandyal, since 2002. The 4th respondent-management runs aided schools in Kurnool District, which are under the control of the Education Department.

3. While the matter stood thus, in the counselling conducted by the 4th respondent for promotions and postings, she was placed at serial No.4 in the roster and was therefore entitled to priority, but the 4th respondent gave preference to the 6th respondent, who opted transfer to Holy Cross Girls High School, Nandyal, despite not having crossed 50 years of age. As such, the petitioner objected to the posting of the 6th respondent in the said Girls High School and submitted representations to respondent Nos.2 and 3, pursuant to which, the 3rd respondent directed the 5th respondent – the District Educational Officer to examine the complaint made by the petitioner. However, it is the case of the petitioner that the 5th respondent furnished an incorrect clarification stating that, even if the 6th respondent was posted in the Girls High School, he would teach only VI and VII Classes. Thereafter, the petitioner has again submitted representations on 04.11.2017, 10.11.2017 and 02.02.2018, requesting to promote her and to post her at Holy Cross Girls High School or S.P.G. High School, Nandyal. It is the case of the petitioner that though the 3rd respondent, vide proceedings dated 19.12.2017, directed respondent Nos.4 and 5 to take appropriate action on the previous representations submitted by the petitioner, no action was initiated.

4. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite her repeated objections/representations, the 4th respondent, vide the impugned proceedings dated 20.03.2018 in R.C.No.02/Promotions/DON/2017, promoted the 6th respondent as School Assistant by posting him at Holy Cross Girls High School, whereas, the petitioner was promoted and posted as School Assistant of CSI high school, Nandikotkur which was not at all opted by her. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

5. The 4th respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit denying the allegations raised by the petitioner. It is admitted that the 6th respondent opted for Holy Cross Girls High School during the open counselling conducted on 02.10.2017, however, it is contended that the petitioner did not raise any objection or submit any written complaint at the time of counselling against the promotion of the 6th respondent. It is stated that the petitioner has merely submitted her written option for S.P.G. Upper Primary School, Govindapalle. As such, the 4th respondent is not aware of the representation submitted by the petitioner before respondent Nos.2 and 3. It is further contended that, pursuant to the petitioner's complaint dated 26.10.2017, the entire process of promotion and counselling was thoroughly verified by the management and the 5th respondent submitted a comprehensive report dated 25.11.2017 furnishing details regarding the counselling, options exercised by the candidates, the consideration of the management and the Government authorities, and the postings of the teachers who were promoted and transferred. It is further stated that the promotion and posting of the 6th respondent at Holy Cross Girls High School is neither illegal nor contrary to the Government guidelines. Holy Cross Girls High School was originally an Upper Primary School, the VI and VII Classes constitute the aided Upper Primary Sections, where both boys and girls study, whereas Classes VIII to X constitute purely unaided sections. The sanctioned aided post of School Assistant (Science) pertains only to Classes VI and VII, and the 6th respondent was promoted and posted against the said aided post. As such, the 6th respondent was not posted to teach the Girls High School sections comprising Classes VIII to X, but only to the aided Upper Primary Sections where co-education is imparted.

6. It is further averred in the counter affidavit that the 3rd respondent, vide proceedings in R.C.No.4166/B2/2017 dated 14.03.2018, permitted the 4th respondent management to give effect to the promotions and transfers, wherein the name of the petitioner was also mentioned; pursuant to which, the 5th respondent, vide letter dated 15.03.2018, informed the Bishop and Manager of the S.P.G. and C.S.I. Diocese of Nandyal Schools to take necessary action and submit a compliance report. Accordingly, the 4th respondent issued the impugned proceedings dated 20.03.2018 promoting and transferring the respective candidates, including the 6th respondent and the petitioner. Hence requested to dismiss the writ petition.

7. The 3rd respondent has also filed a counter affidavit, admitting the facts with regard to appointment of the petitioner; it is contended that basing on her complaint dated 26.10.2017, the 3rd respondent directed the 5th respondent to examine the matter. It is further contended that Holy Cross Girls High School is partly aided, with Classes VI and VII being aided and co-educational, and classes VIII to X are unaided. As such, the posting of the 6th respondent is not contrary to the applicable guidelines. The petitioner’s case was considered on the basis of her seniority, and she was promoted as School Assistant (Science) and posted at C.S.I. High School, Nandikotkur, vide proceedings dated 20.03.2018. As there are no merits in the writ petition, requested to dismiss the writ petition.

8. The 5th respondent has filed an additional counter affidavit on behalf of all the official respondents wherein, it is contended that the petitioner had opted for MPUPS, Govindapalli, but, as there was insufficient student strength in the said school, she was promoted as School Assistant and posted at CSI Aided High School, Nandikotkur. At the same time, the 6th respondent was proposed for promotion as School Assistant (Science) in the aided Upper Primary Sections of Holy Cross School, comprising Classes VI and VII, where both boys and girls were studying. It is further contended that the 4th respondent management had initially submitted proposals for promotion to various vacant aided posts, including the posts at Holy Cross Girls High School, and that the petitioner's name was included among the teachers proposed for promotion. However, the proposals were returned by the 3rd respondent on 26.10.2017 due to certain defects and the proposals were subsequently resubmitted after rectification. It is further contended that the 3rd respondent, vide proceedings dated 14.03.2018, granted permission to the management to effect promotions against available vacancies under Rule 12 of G.O.Ms.No.1, Education Department, dated 01.01.1994, and to submit the proposals for approval through the proper channel. Pursuant thereto, the management issued the proceedings dated 20.03.2018 and subsequently submitted proposals for approval on 06.04.2018.

9. It is further averred that the petitioner did not join the promotional post of School Assistant (BS) at CSI Aided High School, Nandikotkur, and instead sought to continue in her existing school after approaching this Court. It is stated that the petitioner was otherwise eligible for promotion and that the post of School Assistant (BS) at CSI Aided High School, Nandikotkur, was vacant and specifically kept available for her, as there was no vacancy for the said post at Nandyal. Since the petitioner had attained the age of superannuation and retired from service on 30.06.2026, the relief sought in the amendment petition (I.A.No.2 of 2026) for promotion with notional benefits from 14.03.2018 and consequential benefits is no longer feasible. Hence requested to dismiss the writ petition.

10. Heard Sri. Bethapalli Surya Narayana, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education.

11. During the course of hearing, though learned counsel for the petitioner advanced detailed submissions on various aspects of the promotion and posting of the petitioner as well as the 6th respondent, he brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner has retired from service on 30.06.2026. As such, learned counsel fairly limited his relief and confined his submissions to seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for notional promotion from the relevant date, together with arrears and consequential benefits, in accordance with law. He further relied on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Union of India Vs. K.V. Jankiraman and ors., (1991 AIR 2010) and a decision of this Court in Assistant Secretary to Government and ors., Vs. A. Venkata Rao and another (1991 (1) ALT 439).

12. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader reiterated the contents of the counter affidavits and vehemently contended that the petitioner, though promoted and posted as School Assistant at C.S.I. High School, Nandikotkur, did not join the promotional post and continued in her existing post till her retirement from service on 30.06.2026. Having not joined or discharged duties in the promotional post, the petitioner cannot claim monetary benefits or arrears of salary on the basis of such promotion. Hence, requested to dismiss the writ petition.

13. Perused the entire material available on record. The case of the petitioner is that in the year 1995, she was initially appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher and has been working at S.P.G. Model Primary School, Nandyal, since 2002. In the roster/seniority list for promotion, the petitioner was placed at Serial No.4. In an open counselling conducted by the respondent authorities on 02.10.2017 for promotion and posting of eligible teachers, the 6th respondent opted for Holy Cross Girls High School, Nandyal, which was objected by the petitioner on the ground that the 6th respondent was a male teacher who had not crossed 50 years of age and therefore the 6th respondent cannot be posted in a Girls High School. It is the further case of the petitioner that, in view of the option exercised by the 6th respondent, the petitioner was constrained to opt for S.P.G. Upper Primary School, Govindapalle, which was also not considered. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted representations before the competent authorities questioning the promotion and posting of the 6th respondent and requested her case for promotion and posting at Holy Cross Girls High School or S.P.G. High School, Nandyal. It is the further case of the petitioner that, notwithstanding her objections and the subsequent consideration of the promotion proposals, the 4th respondent issued impugned proceedings dated 20.03.2018 promoting and posting the 6th respondent at Holy Cross Girls High School. The said proceedings are under challenge before this Court, however, the petitioner could not succeed in obtaining any interim suspension of the same, as on the date of filing of the writ petition and she did not join the promotional post and continued to work at S.P.G. Aided Primary School, Nandyal. However, as the petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2026, she is claiming the relief of granting notional promotion from 14.03.2017 along with all consequential benefits.

14. On the other hand, the respondents contend that the entire promotion process was conducted through open and transparent counselling on 02.10.2017; that all eligible teachers were given an opportunity to exercise their options in writing and that the petitioner herself participated in the counselling; the petitioner opted for S.P.G. Upper Primary School, Govindapalli. However, as there was insufficient student strength in the said school, her option could not be considered and, in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.40 dated 18.06.2013, the petitioner was promoted as School Assistant (Biological Science) and posted at C.S.I. Aided High School, Nandikotkur. After scrutiny of the proposals, the 3rd respondent, vide proceedings dated 14.03.2018, granted permission to the 4th respondent management to effect promotions against the available vacancies in accordance with the applicable rules and to submit the proposals for approval through the proper channel. Pursuant thereto, the management issued the impugned proceedings dated 20.03.2018.

15. It is also the case of the respondents that though the petitioner was promoted as School Assistant (Biological Science) and posted at C.S.I. Aided High School, Nandikotkur, against an available vacancy, she did not join the same and as such, the post was kept available for her. Instead, the petitioner sought to be continued at S.P.G. Aided Primary School, Nandyal, while pursuing her grievance before this Court. As such, the petitioner was not denied promotion altogether; rather, she did not avail the promotional posting that was offered to her. It can also be observed that the petitioner continued in her existing post and retired from service on 30.06.2026 on attaining the age of superannuation.

16. At this stage, it is necessary to distinguish between a claim for promotion and a claim for monetary benefits attached to the promotional post. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was promoted as School Assistant and was posted to C.S.I. Aided High School, Nandikotkur pursuant to the proceedings dated 20.03.2018. The records reveal that a posting order was issued directing the petitioner to assume charge in the promoted post. However, the petitioner did not join the promotional post, instead, she had made representations seeking retention at S.P.G. Aided Primary School, Nandyal. The documents placed on record would clearly indicate that the respondent had consciously chosen to remain at S.P.G. Aided Primary School, Nandyal rather than joining the promotional post C.S.I. Aided High School, Nandikotkur. Having retained at S.P.G. Aided Primary School, Nandyal, the petitioner cannot claim the salary attached to the promotional post for the period during which she did not discharge the duties of a promotional post. The petitioner consciously did not join the post and sought to continue in her existing post while pursuing the present litigation. In such circumstances, the petitioner cannot claim parity with her junior i.e., the 6th respondent who had actually assumed charge in the promoted post. Having opted to remain S.P.G. Aided Primary School, Nandyal, the petitioner cannot subsequently claim notional promotion from an earlier date i.e., 14.03.2018 so as to secure financial benefits which were otherwise available only to those who had actually assumed charge in the promoted post.

17. Furthermore, the petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2026 and, therefore, there is no question of directing her to join or discharge duties in the promotional post at this stage. The question that remains for consideration is:

                  Whether, notwithstanding her failure to join the promotional post, the petitioner has established any entitlement to notional promotion from the date claimed by her and, consequently, for revision of her pension, gratuity and other retirement benefits?

18. In this regard, the petitioner failed to establish that she was prevented by the authorities from joining the promotional post. Admittedly, she participated in the counselling process and exercised her option for S.P.G. Upper Primary School, Govindapalli. As the said school did not have the requisite student strength, her option could not be given priority. The petitioner’s case was thereafter considered by the authorities and she was promoted as School Assistant (Biological Science) and was posted at C.S.I. Aided High School, Nandikotkur, against an available vacancy. It is to be noted that the petitioner did not join the promotional post at C.S.I. High School, Nandikotkur; as such, the said post was kept available for her and that she was not prevented from joining the same. Thus, the petitioner cannot claim that she was denied a promotional post altogether. The main grievance of the petitioner is that she was not promoted/posted to the particular place of posting as claimed by her i.e., in Nandyal. Mere seniority or participation in the counselling process does not, by itself, confer a right upon an employee to claim promotion to a particular post or posting at a particular station, unless such right is otherwise established under the applicable rules or guidelines.

19. The judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner (referred supra) are clearly distinguishable on facts and is of no assistance to the case of the petitioner. The said judgment deals with an entirely different issue, namely, the applicability of the sealed cover procedure where an employee, otherwise due for promotion, is denied consideration or promotion on account of pending disciplinary/criminal proceedings, and the consequential entitlement to notional promotion upon his/her exoneration. In the present case, there was neither any disciplinary or criminal proceedings pending against the petitioner nor was her promotion withheld on account of such proceedings.

20. The petitioner has also not established that the proceedings dated 14.03.2018, by way of which the management was permitted to effect promotions against available vacancies after scrutiny of the proposals, conferred upon her any specific right to be promoted and posted only at Holy Cross Girls High School or S.P.G. High School, Nandyal. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was promoted and posted at C.S.I. High School, Nandikotkur. Therefore, material available on record does not show that the petitioner was unlawfully deprived of a promotion which had accrued to her against the vacancy claimed by her. In such circumstances, the petitioner cannot seek notional promotion merely on the premise that she was senior to the 6th respondent or that she had raised objections to his posting at Holy Cross Girls High School. Notional promotion can be granted only when the employee establishes a legal entitlement to have his/her promotion ante-dated to the relevant date. As such, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed.

21. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed.