THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
WRIT PETITION No.30525 of 2022
ORDER:
This Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
"....to issue a Writ, Order more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings Rc.No.13104/B4/B1/2008 dated 07.09.2018 issued by the 1st respondent though petitioner is more meritorious candidates vide Proceeding Dated; 22.06.2022, it is clear from the letter from the letter No.56/MRC./2022 dated 23.06.2022 like who got less marks 33, 36, 36.5 whereas the petitioner secured 37.50 despite the orders of this Court in W.P.No.2056/2018 purely non-application of mind and assessing the merit of the petitioner and not considering his case for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teachers in DSC-2008 of agency as per his marks and rank and merit under S.T. category, though the Government has allowed his revision petition by G.O.Ms.No.34, SW dated 21.02.2014 despite the directions to the District Collector to take further action and making correspondence among the respondents vide Prc.Dt.05.08.2015 and Proc.RC No.38/RC1/2024 dated 12.11.2016...."2
SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022
2. Heard Sri Prathap Narayan Sanghi, Learned Senior Counsel for Sri Avadesh Narayan Sanghi, appearing for the petitioner and the learned Governments Pleader for Services-I, appearing for respondentNos.1 to 6.
3. The Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe community and local of Warangal Scheduled Area and fully eligible and qualified for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher. The petitioner applied for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher (SGT) in pursuance to the notification issued by the respondent No.3 in DSC-2008 and he has been issued Hall Ticket No.21200107286 and secured 37.50 marks with district rank of 9786 and the cut off mark is 32.50 (General), and therefore the petitioner is within the zone of consideration for appointment to the SGT. 3
SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022
4. The Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner further submits that out of 179 posts of SGT teachers were notified in DSC-2008. At the time of selection process the Tribal Organization viz., Thudem Debba found that some candidates with bogus Scheduled Tribe Caste certificates have also applied by depriving the genuine candidates and also requested to verify the genuineness of the said certificates as it is against G.O.Ms.No.3 SW/TW Department dated 10.01.2000 and some of them have approached the High Court vide W.P.No.15563 of 2010.
5. The Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that after hearing the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.34, Social Welfare Department, dated 21.02.2014 upholding their local ST certificates by setting aside of the District Collector order in cancelling the local ST candidate certificates issued by 4 SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022 the Tahsildar in respect of seven candidates are set aside and upholding their local ST certificate as 'genuine' wherein the petitioner is one among them of 7, who stands at Sl.No.4.
6. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that three candidates above the petitioner were appointed in the three vacancies which were kept in abeyance viz.; G.Vijeyender, B.Yelulal and A.Suresh respectively though the petitioner is also within the zone of consideration as per his marks and rank since his certificate of local S.T is upheld by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.34, Social Welfare Department, Dated 21.02.2014, his case is not being considered which is illegal and unjust.
7. The learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that despite the caste certificate of the petitioner is genuine and the same was upheld by the 5 SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022 Government and internal correspondence among the respondents, the respondents were not considered the case of the petitioner. Recently the respondents have issued appointment orders of DSC 2008 erstwhile Warangal District Agency list on 26.02.2022 wherein the candidates who got less marks than the petitioner were included at Sl.No.4, 5 and 6 like Banothu Ravi (HT 2120017541), secured 36.50 with Rank No. 10114. Banothu Venkanna (HT No.2120012318) secured 36 marks, with Rank No.10422 and Azmeera Rajanna (HT No.2120016029) secured 33 marks with Rank No.11480, whereas the petitioner has secured 37.5 marks with Rank No. 9786 and therefore the petitioner is agitating his right to be appointed as per his merit
8. The learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that despite the above factual position the 1st 6 SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022 respondent issued impugned proceedings while appointing less meritorious candidates than the petitioner on 23.06.2022 and requested to allow the writ petition.
9. The learned Government Pleader for Services-I basing on the counter submits that the contention of the writ petitioner that one Banoth Ravi, Banoth Venkanna and Azmeera Rajanna, who secured 36.50 marks, 36 marks and 33 marks respectively, who secured got lesser marks than the petitioner, were appointed as SGT but failed to implead them as party respondents. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in catena judgments, held that not impleading the effected parties is bad in law and courts cannot pass orders against them in the absence of them and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on that ground alone. 7
SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022
10. The Learned Government Pleader further submits that there are 179 Posts of SGT were notified in DSC- 2008 in Agency Area in which 98 posts are under control of DEO Agency area, and the remaining 81 posts of SGT are under the control of the Project Officer, ITDA. Though the selections were held the list is kept in abeyance for want of genuinity of agency area. One V.Gopinath and five others and one L.Ramesh and seven others filed Writ Petition Nos.34980 of 2017 and 1530 of 2017 respectively and this Court passed common order on 27.12.2021 directing the respondents therein to consider the cases of the petitioners for appointment to the post of SGT with all consequential benefits by duly taking into account the report of the District Collector. Accordingly, as per the Government Memo No.5551/Ser./II/A2/2022 dated 31.05.2022 has accorded permission to the Director of School 8 SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022 Education, Hyderabad to implement the common order passed by this Court so as to avoid further legal complications.
11. The Learned Government Pleader further submits that earlier the petitioner approached this court by filing W.P.No.2056 of 2018 and this court in I.A.No.1 of 2018 directed the 1st respondent therein to consider the application of the petitioner for appointment of the petitioner to the post of SGT as per the proceedings dated 12.11.2015 of the respondent that the application of the petitioner was examined and rejected on the ground of non-availability of SGT post and the unfilled posts of SGTs of DSC-2008 had been carried forward to TRT 2017 and there no clear vacancy is available and requested to dismiss the writ petition.
9
SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022
12. After hearing both sides this Court and on perusing the records, this Court is of the considered view that the case of the petitioner was rejected in Proceeding dated 07.09.2018 that petitioner does not come under zone of consideration for issue of posting orders as Secondary Grade Teacher (SGT) in Scheduled Area due to non-availability of the post and as per the his merit as on the date of passing impugned orders.
13. The specific plea of the petitioner is that, the respondents have appointed the candidates who got less marks than the petitioner viz., Banoth Ravi (HT No.2120017541), secured 36.50 Marks with Rank No.10114; Banothu Venkanna (HT No.2120012318), secured 36 marks with Rank No.10422 and Azmeera Rajanna (HT No.2120016020), secured 33 marks, with Rank No.11480, whereas the petitioner secured 37.5 10 SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022 marks with Rank No.9786. Basing on the complaint made by some Tribal Associations, initially the case of the petitioner and others were kept in abeyance, thereafter the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.34, Social Welfare Department, dated 21.02.2014, considering the caste certificate of the petitioner as genuine by setting aside the District Collector's order in cancelling the local S.T. certificates issued by the Tahsildar in respect of seven candidates. The respondents in their counter without given any reply about the contention raised by the petitioner with regard to selection of less meritorious candidates than the petitioner, stated that without impleading the effected parties writ petition is liable to be dismissed. On the other hand the respondents in their counter stating that basing on the common order passed by this court in W.P.Nos.34980 of 2017 and 1530 of 2017 on 27.12.2021 issued posting orders therein in 11 SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022 compliance of the order of this court and in view of the same, there are no vacancies available to appoint the petitioner as SGT.
14. The operative portion of the common orders of this Court passed in W.P.Nos.34980 of 2017 and 1530 of 2017 on 27.12.2021, is as follows:
"This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the learned Counsel for respective parties, is of the considered view that when the petitioners were coming within the zone of consideration for appointment to the post of SGT in pursuance of DSC-2008, some of the unsuccessful candidates made a complaint against the petitioners that the Scheduled Tribe certificates held by them are not genuine, and because of that complaint, the cases of the petitioners were not considered. However, after conducting a detailed enquiry on the said complaint, the District Collector has submitted a report on 17.08.2017 holding that the Scheduled Tribe certificates of the petitioners are found to be genuine and also the District Collector has recommended the cases of the petitioners to be considered for appointment to the post of SGT. Therefore, the respondents cannot deny appointment to the petitioners on the ground that there are no vacancies.12
SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022 Further, since the respondents have issued appointment orders in favour of similarly situated persons vide Proceedings dated 26.07.2016 and the cases of the petitioner stand on the same footing, the respondents are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners for appointment to the post of SGT with all consequential benefits by duly taking into account of the report of the District Collector dated 17.06.2017 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a reasonable period of time, preferably within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order".
15. In view of the above directions this Court in the above Writ Petitions, the respondents have to pass orders in accordance with law, but not given direction to forgo merit and issue appointment orders to the petitioners therein. The respondents without taking into account of the same issued appointment orders to the less meritorious candidates than the petitioner. The respondents cannot deny appointment to the petitioner on the ground that the respondents have issued appointment orders in favour of similarly 13 SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022 situated persons vide Proceedings dated 26.07.2016 and 31.05.2022, and appointed less meritorious candidates.
16. In view of the same, the impugned orders in rejecting the case of the petitioner in Proc.RC No.13104/B4/B1/2008 dated 07.09.2018 by the Respondent No.1 is liable to be set aside and accordingly set aside.
17. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed by directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as SGT with all consequential benefits. If no post is available, create a supernumerary post and adjust the less meritorious candidates than the petitioner till the post is available. 14
SK,J W.P.No.30525 of 2022
18. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH, Date:15.03.2023 trr