Telangana High Court
Kanamalla Harikrishna vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others on 22 July, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
WRIT PETITION No.5871 of 2023
ORDER (per Hon'ble SP,J)
Sri K. Kiran Kumar, Learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Pavan Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for High Court for the State of Telangana, for respondent No.2.
2. On the joint request, the matter is finally heard.
3. In this petition, the grievance of petitioner is that although he was provisionally selected for the post of Stenographer Grade-III, his provisional selection was erroneously cancelled.
4. The admitted facts between the parties are that the petitioner, unofficial respondent and other similarly situated candidates submitted their candidature pursuant to Notification dated 31.07.2019, inviting candidature for the post in question. The petitioner and other candidates were considered and petitioner's name finds place in the provisional selected list.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the abstract of vacancies in Karimnagar District shows that there were two vacancies in SC category, out of which, one was reserved for women. Thus, the petitioner had a claim against one SC vacancy 2 which is not earmarked for women. The stand of learned counsel for the petitioner is that as per the qualification prescribed, the petitioner although was not having the qualification of passing shorthand higher grade examination and was only having qualification of passing shorthand lower grade examination, the unofficial respondent alone should not have been selected when he was only remaining candidate having qualification of higher grade examination. He fairly submits that he is not challenging the validity of Recruitment Rules yet the official respondents should have considered his claim because in the written examination conducted by the selecting authority, present petitioner has secured 52.33 marks whereas, unofficial respondent has secured 49.83 marks.
6. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the selection in question is governed by the statutory Recruitment Rules issued through G.O.Ms.No.29, dated 18.05.2018. The aforesaid Notification is issued in exercise of proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India and therefore, the Recruitment Rules are statutory in nature.
7. By taking this Court to Item 6 of Annexure-P1 of the Rules, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent submits that a conjoint reading of the Annexure as well as the qualification prescribed through the aforesaid Notification makes it clear that 3 the candidates, who have passed the lower grade examination, can be considered only if candidates having passed examination by higher grade are not available. Since the unofficial respondent is admittedly having qualification of higher grade examination, the present petitioner, who has only passed the lower grade examination, has no enforceable right. Apart from this, reliance is placed on the document, dated 19.06.2012, filed with the counter to bolster the submission that even lower grade qualification acquired by the petitioner from the State of Techinical Board, Tamil Nadu is not equivalent and the State Board of Technical Education and Training, Hyderabad has not recommended the petitioner.
8. No other point is pressed by learned counsel for the parties.
9. A comparative reading of Entry 6 of Annexure-P1, G.O.Ms.No.29, dated 18.05.2018, shows that the qualification so prescribed in the Recruitment Rules is reduced in writing in the shape of "qualification prescribed". The relevant entry reads as under:
"3. Must have passed Telangna Government Techinacal Examination in English Shorthand by Higher Grade (120 words per minute) or equivalent examination.
Provided that if candidates who have passed the examination by Higher Grade are not available, those who have passed the examination by Lower Grade will be considered".
(Emphasis by us) 4
10. A plain reading of this statutory provision, which is not subject matter of challenge before us, makes it clear that if a higher grade examination passed candidate is available, those who have passed the lower grade examination will not be considered. The language of the Rule is plain and unambiguous. This is trite that when Rule is clear and unambiguous, it should be given effect to, irrespective of the consequences (see Nelson Motis v. Union of India 1). Admittedly, the constitutionality of the Recruitment Rules are not subject matter of challenge. In this backdrop, it is clear that no fault can be found in the action of the official respondents in not considering the petitioner and cancelling his provisional selection because a higher grade SC candidate was available in Karimnagar District. Merely, because only one candidate was available with higher grade qualification in Karimnagar District, neither his selection nor his appointment can be said to be invalid or unconstitutional. So far, other grounds taken in the counter regarding the eligibility of the petitioner in relation to lower grade examination is concerned, we are not inclined to give any opinion on this aspect because the said aspect was not the reason for rejecting the petitioner's provisional selection. In view of Constitution Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi 2 , it is well established that validity of an order has to be tested on the 1 (1992) 4 SCC 711 2 (1978) 1 SCC 405 5 ground mentioned therein and it cannot be supported by furnishing additional reasons in the counter affidavit.
11. In this view of the matter, the cancellation of provisional appointment of the petitioner is inconsonance with the Recruitment Rules and there is no question of cancelling the appointment of unofficial respondent, who had the preferential right of selection, in view of the Recruitment Rules.
12. Thus, the Writ Petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No costs.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
_____________ Sujoy Paul, J _______________________________ Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao, J 22nd July, 2024 Myk/Tsr