IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
WRIT APPEAL No.27 of 2021
(Taken up through video conferencing)
The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary,
School Education Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi,
Guntur District, A.P. and others.
.. Appellants.
Versus
M. Giri Siva Sadgurudu, S/o Mangali Maddaiah,
R/o H.No.0-101, Mangali Veedhi, Veldurthi,
Kurnool District.
..Respondent.
Counsel for the Appellants : Mr. Syed Khader Masthan, Government Pleader representing Additional Advocate General Counsel for the respondent : Mr. Kambhampati Ramesh Babu ORAL JUDGMENT Dt: 05.02.2021 per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 29.02.2020 passed by this Court in W.P.No.45455 of 2018.
2. The writ petitioner had appeared for written test conducted on 10.05.2012 for Trained Graduate Teachers (TGT) and on 11.05.2012 for Post-Graduate Teachers (PGT) and the results were declared on 07.10.2012. The final selection lists were displayed on 23.01.2015 and 26.04.2015. The writ petitioner belongs to BC-A category and he had 2 HCJ & CPK, J W.A.No.27 OF 2021 appeared for PGT-Telugu in Zone-IV for the written examination and was placed in rank 146.
3. Aggrieved by the final lists, some candidates approached this Court by filing W.P.No.9873 of 2015 and batch, wherein this Court directed the respondents to redraw the provisional list in terms of Para 11(f) of G.O.Ms.No.25, dated 04.04.2013.
4. The case of the writ petitioner is that in the provisional list that was redrawn, his name finds place, but he was not given appointment order on the ground that he was not a party to W.P.No.9873 of 2015 and batch.
5. At paragraph Nos.5 and 6 of the order under appeal, the learned single Judge noted as follows:
"5. The respondents' counsel does not deny the fact that the petitioner was shown in the redraw merit list and that he is eligible for being appointed as PGT (Telugu).
6. The petitioner need not be a party to the writ petition, which is filed by the other candidates. When the direction in the writ petition is to redraw the list and when the petitioner's name finds place in the redrawn list, he would automatically be entitled for being appointed as PGT (Telugu)."
Accordingly, the respondents were directed to appoint the writ petitioner for the post of PGT (Telugu) forthwith.
6. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the appellants submits that the writ petitioner did not approach this Court making a grievance about the final list and the appellants did not rightly consider his case for 3 HCJ & CPK, J W.A.No.27 OF 2021 appointment. It is also submitted that the writ petitioner could not have been even otherwise appointed because all the vacancies were filled up. Learned Counsel for the appellants has drawn the attention of this Court to paragraph No.9 of the counter-affidavit filed by the appellants in the writ petition.
7. At this juncture, it will be appropriate to take note of G.O.Ms.No.25, dated 04.04.2013. It is relevant to extract paragraph No.11 therein as under:
"11. Verification of certificates:
a) The Additional Director, Model Schools shall prepare with the approval of the Selection Committee a provisional list to the extent of vacancies notified, for each category of post notified, on the basis of the merit list and publish the same on the notice boards of the offices of the District Collector and District Educational Officer and also on the designated website, along with the date, time and venue fixed for verification of certificates. The Additional Director, Model Schools shall also issue a press note in the news papers for wide publicity in this regard.
b) The Committees as constituted in the Annexure-I and Annexure-II to these guidelines shall conduct the verification of original certificates of the candidates for the posts of Principal and the Posts of Post Graduate Teacher (PGT) and Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT), respectively, as per the schedule and at the venues specified by the Selection Committee.
4
HCJ & CPK, J W.A.No.27 OF 2021
c) As the processing of applications is made online so far, the process of verification of certificates of candidates included in provisional list may, in certain cases, also result in, i. Failure of the candidate to attend for verification of certificates.
ii. Failure of the candidate to produce the original certificate/s relevant to his/her eligibility and selection.
iii. Inclusion of a candidate in the provisional list of more than one category.
d) As regards c(i) above, the Additional Director, Model Schools shall send a personal intimation to the address furnished by the candidate, to attend along with all relevant original certificates on the date fixed for the said purpose, as a final chance.
e) In case the candidate fails to attend even on the date so fixed, he/she shall forfeit his/her right to be considered for selection.
f) In the event of c(ii) & c(iii) and (d) above, the provisional list shall be redrawn by the Selection Committee drawing next candidate/s from the merit list to the extent necessary, however, subject to the condition that the number of candidates included shall not be more than the number of vacancies notified for that particular category. In so far as the candidate covered by c(iii) above, this exercise shall be done only after obtaining the option of such candidate at the time of verification of certificates itself."
5
HCJ & CPK, J W.A.No.27 OF 2021
8. Perusal of the above goes to show that in terms of paragraph No.11
(f), provisional list shall be redrawn by the Selection Committee drawing next candidate/s from the merit list to the extent necessary. However, the same is subject to the condition that the number of candidates included shall not be more than the number of vacancies notified for that particular category.
9. Paragraph No.9 of the counter-affidavit filed by the appellants in the writ petition is quoted hereunder:
"9. In reply to para no.8 & 12, it is humbly submitted that the petitioner herein belong has applied for the post of TGT-Hindi under BC-B in Zone-IV, and has secured 66.07 marks and Rank 154. It is respectfully submitted that, this respondents has already re-drawn the selection lists in obedience of the orders of the Hon'ble High Court dated 12.9.2016. The Hon'ble High Court therein clearly mentioned to re-draw the selection list and consider the case of the petitioners therein for appointment if they come in the final selection list. This itself shows that, selection is limited to the petitioners in the WP and batch only but not for those candidates who have not approached the Hon'ble High Court. In view of the same, the representations submitted by the petitioner have not been considered."
10. Perusal of the above paragraph goes to show that while the writ petitioner was seeking appointment in the post of PGT (Telugu) in Zone IV, the averments are made in connection with the post of TGT-Hindi, which has no relevance. Even then it is not the case of the appellants that merit 6 HCJ & CPK, J W.A.No.27 OF 2021 position of the writ petitioner did not warrant appointment in particular category of post to which the writ petitioner had applied. Appellants' only contention is that authorities had to confine their consideration only to the candidates, who had approached this Court. The reasoning is fallacious. It cannot be countenanced that if in the redrawn list there are more meritorious candidates above the candidates who had approached the Court earlier, they have to be ignored. Redrawn list is based on merit and some petitioners in the earlier round of litigation may not be entitled to get appointment on the basis of their position in the merit list. It was necessary for the authorities to adhere to the redrawn merit list. As rightly held by the learned single Judge that in the facts and circumstances of the case, merely because the writ petitioner was not a party to the earlier round of litigation, it cannot held that he is not entitled to appointment.
11. In view of the above discussion, we find no ground to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge.
12. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J
Nn
7
HCJ & CPK, J
W.A.No.27 OF 2021
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No.27 of 2021 (per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ) Dt: 05.02.2021 Nn