The Hon'ble Smt. Justice P. Madhavi Devi
W.P. Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of
2018
COMMON ORDER:
These writ petitions are filed by the petitioners
seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of
Respondents in not fixing different cut off marks for
Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy Districts for appointment
to the post of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee Police
Constables, pursuant to the notification issued by the
respondents dated 31.12.2015 as illegal arbitrary,
discriminatory and unconstitutional and to further
declare that the respondents are bound to fix different
cut off marks for Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy
Districts and to pass such other order or orders as this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case.
PMD, J
W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018
2
2. Brief Facts
leading to the filing of the present Writ Petitions are that the second respondent issued a notification in Rc.No. 151/Rect./Admn.1/2015, dated 31.12.2015 inviting applications for the post of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee (SCT) Police Constable (Civil) (Men & Women) in Police Department, Stipendiary Cadet Trainee (SCT) Police Constable (AR) (Men & Women) in Police Department, Stipendiary Cadet Trainee (SCT) Police Constable (SARCPL) (Men) in Police Department, Stipendiary Cadet Trainee (SCT) Police Constable (TSSP) (Men) in Police Department, Constable (Men) in Special Protection Force (SPF) Department & Firemen in Telangana State Disaster Response & Fire Services Department vide post code Nos. 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 respectively. The applications were available in the website from 11.01.2016 to 04.02.2016 and the minimum education qualification for the said post was Intermediate or its PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 3 equivalent examination recognized by the State Government as on 01.07.2015. In the case of candidates belonging to scheduled caste and scheduled tribes, as on 01.07.2015, he/she must have passed "SSC or its equivalent examination recognized by the Telangana State Government and should have studied Intermediate or appearing Intermediate examination, in both the first and second years". Certain medical standards were also prescribed. As per the instruction No. 15, the selection procedure/scheme was given and all the eligible candidates who applied for various posts shall be required to appear for the preliminary written test in one paper and those candidates qualified in the above preliminary test would have to undergo physical measurements test. The persons who are qualified in the physical measurements test/physical efficiency test, will appear for final written examination.
PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 4
3. All the petitioners in the above writ petitions have appeared for the preliminary written test held on 24.04.2016 and pursuant to their qualifying the preliminary written test, petitioners have received an intimation from the Board asking them to appear for physical measurement test/physical efficiency test. In the Physical Measurement Test, the height and chest of the candidate would be taken and Physical Efficiency Test consists of 5 events i.e. 1) 100 metres run, 2) Long Jump, 3) Shot Put (7.26 Kgs.), 4) High Jump and 5) 800 metres run. For the post code No. 21 to 26 different Physical Efficiency Tests were conducted.
4. All the petitioners appeared for Physical Measurement Test & Physical Efficiency Test on different dates and all of them were found successful in the PMT/PET. Thereafter, the petitioners were PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 5 issued Hall Tickets for appearing in final written examination which was held on 23.10.2016.
5. It is submitted that instruction No. 15(f) for Post Code No.21 & 26 provided that the final selection will be strictly on relative merit of the candidate in each category as obtained by them based on their score in the final written examination out of maximum of 200 marks and as per the provisions of " The Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) order 1975" and its amendments. It was further provided that as per the G.O.Ms.No. 8, General Administration Department, dated 08.01.2002 while filling up the vacancies, the first 20% posts should be filled from a combined merit list of locals and non locals and thereafter, the remaining 80% posts shall be filled up by locals only.
PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 6
6. It is submitted that for the Post Code No. 22, the selection was to be made strictly on relative merit of the candidates in each category as obtained by them based on their score out of 175 marks i.e. (Physical Efficiency Test 75 marks), final written examination 100 marks + weightage marks).
7. It is submitted that for Post Code No. 23, 24 & 25, the final selection will be made strictly on relative merit of the candidates in each category as obtained by them based on their score out of 175 marks i.e. (Physical Efficiency Test (75 marks) and written examination 100 marks and reservation for local candidates is provided.
8. It is submitted that all the petitioners who have appeared for the final examination held on 23.10.2016, had fared well in the examination and were waiting for the results. When the results were published on PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 7 17.02.2017 in the website, the petitioners hall ticket numbers did not find place.
9. It is submitted that initially, in the notification dated 31.12.2015, 166 posts of Police Constable (Civil) were notified and for Police Constable (AR) 533 posts were notified. Subsequently, vide supplementary notification dated 15.02.2017 for Police Constable (Civil), another 255 posts and for Police Constable (AR), another 599 posts in CP, Cyberabad were notified. Therefore, the total number of posts including civil & A.R. put together notified for Cyberabad are 1553 where as for Ranga Reddy District 29 posts of Police Constable (Civil) & 47 posts of Police Constables (AR) were notified.
10. It is submitted that during 2012 recruitment for the same posts, in the combined state of Andhra Pradesh, notification had notified different posts in different districts and units and while finalizing the PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 8 selection, cut off marks were fixed differently for the posts in Cyberabad and for the posts in Ranga Reddy District and therefore equal justification was done to the candidates who appeared from Cyberabad and from Ranga Reddy District respectively.
11. However, in the final selection made pursuant to the notification dated 31.12.2015, it is alleged that the cut off marks/ranks were not taken into consideration for Ranga Reddy & Cyberabad separately and in fact, the second respondent has taken only 1 cut off mark for both Cyberabad & Ranga Reddy District which according to them is illegal and arbitrary and has caused grave injustice to them.
12. It is submitted that the different cut off marks were fixed for community wise posts but only one cut off marks was fixed for both Cyberabad Commissionerate and Ranga Reddy Districts and therefore the petitioners who belonged to Cyberabad PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 9 District have not been found to have been selected in the final list and are put to great loss and injury. Challenging the said action of the respondents, the present writ petitions are filed.
13. The learned counsel for the petitioner, while relying upon the averments made in the writ affidavit, submitted that the Telangana State Police Subordinate Service rules govern the appointment of posts of Police Constables which occurs in category 7 of the said services.
14. It is submitted that the post for Police Constable is a district post and the unit head of each district is the appointing authority. It is submitted that the respondents, while issuing the notification have separately given number of vacancies in respect of Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy Districts. It is submitted that having so given, the cut off marks also ought to have been given separately for Cyberabad and Ranga PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 10 Reddy as was done in the earlier state of Andhra Pradesh where cut off marks were given separately for Vishakapatnam City and Vishakapatnam Rural and Warangal Urban and Warangal Rural etc.,.
15. It is further submitted that the contention of the respondents that the entire Cyberabad area falls in Ranga Reddy District is not correct. As Police Constable (Civil) Post Code No. 21 and Police Constable Police Armed Reserve Post Code No. 22 are district cadre according to the presidential order. It is submitted that the petitioners are seeking appointment strictly in accordance with the notification and it is the duty of the respondents also to make appointments in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the notification.
16. It is submitted that when the rules are provided for different units of appointment i.e. Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy separately, the appointment made in PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 11 violation there of are ultra virus the presidential order. He placed reliance upon the following judgments in support of his contention:-
17. 1991 O AIR(SC) 2113-Govt. of AP and others Vs A. Suryanarayana 2002 O AIR(SC)77-V. Jagannadha Rao & others Vs. State of AP 2007(4) ALD 209-Government of AP Vs. P. Vema Reddy 2007(4) ALD 105-G. Raja Babu Vs. Government of AP 2003 ALD(6) 522-M. Kesavulu Vs. State of AP
18. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner Nos. 2,4,5,6,7,10,11,12,13,14,16, 17,18,19,20,21 & 22 were appointed as Police Constables in pursuance of notification issued in the year 2018 and therefore, no PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 12 relief need to be given to them and that the grant of relief is limited only to petitioner Nos. 1,3,8,9,15,23,24 & 25.
19. The learned Government Pleader representing Home, however refuted the above contentions of the petitioners and relied upon the averments made in the counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit it is stated that by virtue of GO Ms. No. 354 dated 15.11.2002 Cyberabad has created out of Ranga Reddy District only for the purpose of law and order but it is part of Ranga Reddy District for the purposes of appointments.
20. It is submitted that the notification has to be read in its entirety and not in piece meal. He referred to the Stipendiary Cadet Trainee rules stated in GO Ms. No. 315 dated 13.10.1999 to demonstrate that the said posts are district wise posts and the common cut off PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 13 marks are given for Ranga Reddy and Cyberabad Districts as Cyberabad is part of Ranga Reddy District.
21. It is submitted that the Board has acted strictly in accordance with the notification. As regards the submission of the petitioners that in the earlier notification procedure, different cut off marks were given to the Vishakapatnam Rural and Vishakapatnam Urban etc.,. The learned counsel submitted that an irregular procedure followed earlier need not be followed by the present Government as well and further submits that no right of the petitioners is taken away and their right has to be considered in accordance with the concerned and relevant rules. As regards the different appointing authorities for the districts of Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy are concerned, it is submitted that the Cyberabad Commissioner is higher in rank and therefore PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 14 appointing authority for Ranga Reddy District is Commissioner of Cyberabad .
22. It is submitted that the petitioner have not shown as to how prejudice have been caused to them by providing common cut off marks to Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy Districts. He further submitted that the averments in the counter affidavit and the additional counter affidavit have not been rebutted by the petitioner by filing any reply to the counter affidavit.
23. In rebuttal, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that all the earlier as well the notification of 2015 referred to the presidential order which does not give any procedure for selection. It is submitted that para No. 8 of the presidential order only gives the percentage of reservation to local candidates, while the relevant posts are mentioned in service rules. He submitted that according to A.P. Police Subordinate Service Rules, the unit of PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 15 appointment is a district and each unit has to be considered as separate and appointments are to be made separately and therefore cut off marks also have to be given separately.
24. He submits that the executive instructions cannot override the provisions of rules, particularly with regard to the appointing authority. As regards the procedure followed in the earlier notification and deviation from the same in the notification of 2015, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the reasonable expectation from the Government would be to understand the law in a particular way, to continue to understand in the same way, unless it is understood in another way by the courts. Therefore, he submitted that it was the reasonable expectation of the petitioners that the Government will follow the same procedure until directed otherwise by the Courts. As regards the prejudice caused to the petitioners, he PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 16 submitted that if both districts have been considered as separate units and separate cut off marks were provided, the petitioners would have become eligible to be considered in Cyberabad District and in accordance with the said cut off marks. He placed reliance upon the judgement of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court reported in Prabir Halder v. Union of India to submit that in service matters past practices can be considered.
25. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that while issuing the notification dated 31-12-2015, the respondents have shown the vacancies in respect of the SCT Police Constable (Civil) in Police Department and SCT Police Constables (AR) in Police Department for the districts of Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy separately. Likewise, even the category wise vacancies have been shown for Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy District separately for all the code numbers 21 to 27. However, in the table PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 17 given under last date of receipt of applications, the address for sending applications of both Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy is shown as Cyberabad Police Commissionerate Office, Gachibowli, Ranga Reddy District. Rule 15 of the notification clearly mentions reservation to local candidates in accordance with the presidential order. The notification dated 31.12.2015 has been modified vide notification dated 15.02.2017 by which the number of vacancies have been increased. In the said notification also, vacancies are shown separately for Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy for the Post Code Nos. 21 to 23 only. Therefore, all the candidates who have applied pursuant to the notification dated 31.12.2015 would become eligible for appointment to the increased vacancies as well. Before publishing the results, the cut off ranks/marks for the post of SCT PC (Civil) (Men & Women) 2015 have been published and the common cut off marks PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 18 were provided for Warangal Urban and Warangal Rural as well as Ranga Reddy and Cyberabad. At the time of submission of the applications, when the candidates have to give the preference of posting in each unit or their choice, both Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy are given separately. As per the Annexure I of A.P. Police Subordinate Service Rules, category 7 refers to Constables (Civil) and Constables (A.R.) and special armed reserve central Police laws etc.,. Column 4 of the said annexure is the appointing authority and in the mofussil, the appointing authority for Constables(Civil) is the Superintendent of Police concerned and in Cyberabad City Police, the Deputy Commissioner of Police Cyberabad, and in respect of other urban units of the state, the head of such unit or Commissioner of Police or Superintendent of Police as the case may be is the appointing authority. GO Ms. No. 374, Home (Police Constables) dated 14.12.1999 PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 19 provides for the A.P. Police (Civil) Subordinate Service Rules. Under the said rules, category 4 refers to Police Constable (Civil) and here also the appointing authority is mentioned as above. Rule 12 thereof, refers to unit of appointment and in respect of unit 7 i.e. area under the jurisdiction of Commissioner of Police Cyberabad, it is the Rule 14 thereof that provides all the procedures and tests of recruitment to various posts in the various category. Categories in the service shall be as indicated in the A.P. Stipendiary Cadet Trainee rules of 1999 issued in GO Ms. No. 315 dated 13.10.1999 and as from time to time in Go Ms. No. 98 Home (Legal) dated 01-05-2005 as seen from the above rules, it is noticed that each district is a unit for appointment of Police Constables and the Superintendent of Police would be the appointing authority in respect of the candidates in Ranga Reddy District and the Commissioner of Police would be the PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 20 appropriate authority for appointment in Cyberabad District. However the learned Government Pleader had stated that since the Commissioner of Police is higher in rank than the Superintendent of Police of Ranga Reddy District, it is the Cyberabad Commissioner who would issue the appointment authority. From the above rule, posts under notification issued by the respondents it is noticed that though they have advertised the number of posts sufficiently for Cyberabad and Ranga Reddy they have considered both to be same district and after allotting qualified candidates to the Ranga Reddy first and thereafter other have been allotted to Cyberabad District. This court finds no anomaly in the appointments made by the respondents. The petitioners have been considered for appointment to the posts in Ranga Reddy District thereafter in Cyberabad District. Therefore non- application of different cut of marks to both the PMD, J W.P.Nos.7685, 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 21 districts would not give enough prejudice in all the candidates who have applied for and participated in the appointment process pursuant to the notification dated 31.12.2015.
26. In the result,-
(i) The writ petition No. 7685 of 2017 is dismissed.
(ii) In writ petition Nos. 23304, 7641 of 2017 & 41130 of 2018 also, similar prayer has been made and for the reasons stated above these writ petitions are also dismissed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, in all the above writ petitions, shall also stand dismissed.
_____________________________
JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI
Date: . .2022
myk