Rajeswari Bojjagani vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 1740 AP

            HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

  Writ Petition Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 and 17864 of 2020

COMMON ORDER:


      As the issue involved in all the writ petitions is one and the

same, they are being disposed of by this common order.


      2. Heard Sri Subba Rao Korrapati, learned counsel for the

petitioners in WP No.9164 of 2020, Sri A. Rajendra Babu, learned

counsel for the petitioners in WP No.17864 of 2020, Sri T.S. Rayalu,

learned counsel for the petitioners in WP No.9118 of 2020, Sri Bobbili

Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP No.17367 of 2020,

Mrs. M.L.Neelima, learned counsel for the petitioners in WP No.11961

of 2020, Sri Ponnavolu Sudhakar Reddy, learned Additional Advocate

General, appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri S.Satyanarayana

Rao, learned counsel for impleaded respondents in WP Nos.9118 and

9164 of 2020. Perused the record.

i) WP Nos.9118, 9164, 17367 and 17864 of 2020 are filed 'to declare the impugned Memo dated 20.05.2020 issued by the 2nd respondent to all the DEO's in the State to complete the recruitment process to the post of School Assistant (Telugu) and Language Pandit (Telugu) in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.67, School Education Department dated 26.10.2018 in spite of pending review IA No.1 of 2020 in WP No.19757 of 2019, as illegal and arbitrary.'

ii) WP No.11961 of 2020 is filed 'to declare the action of the respondent authorities in not proceeding with the recruitment process for the posts of School Assistant (Telugu) and Language Pandit (Telugu) in spite of issuing impugned memo dated 20.05.2020 and instructing all the DEO's in the State to complete the recruitment process in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.67 SE Department dated 26.10.2018 under the guise of orders in WP Nos.9164 and 9118 of 2020 dated 26.05.2020, wherein this Court passed

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

interim orders to reserve 33 posts only, is nothing but illegal and arbitrary.'

3. Case of the petitioners in WP No.9118, 9164, 17367 and 17864

of 2020 is that, Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.10.2018

for Teacher Recruitment Test (TRT) for the posts of School Assistants

(SA), Language Pandits (LPs) etc.; as per G.O.Ms.No.67 dated

26.10.2018, Rule 4(2)(i)(f) and Rule 4(2)(ii)(a), prescribes a

qualification for the post of School Assistant (Telugu) and Language

Pandit (Telugu), which is as follows:

"Must possess a bachelor's degree with Telugu as the main subject or one of the three equal optional subjects or Bachelor's degree in Oriental language in Telugu (BOL) or its equivalent and B.Ed., with Telugu as methodology subject or Telugu Pandit training or its equivalent".

Government has issued an amendment to G.O.Ms.No.67 dated

26.10.2018 through G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 and by virtue of it,

the candidates who are possessing Post Graduate Degree in Telugu are

also made eligible; challenging the said amendment issued vide

G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018, certain candidates have filed OA

No.2516 of 2018 before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal (for short 'the

Tribunal'); the Tribunal passed the following interim order on

16.11.2018.

"Pending further orders in O.A., the respondents may accept the applications of the candidates who are eligible as per the amended version of the notification vide G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018, but the results shall not be announced."

The petitioners, who are eligible, pursuant to amended G.O.Ms.No.70,

were under the impression that the State will take care and complete

the recruitment process; in the meanwhile, the Tribunal was abolished;

challenging the interim orders passed by the Tribunal in OA No.2516 of

2018 dated 16.11.2018, the Department has filed WP No.19757 of 2019

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

before the Division Bench of this Court; the said writ petition was

disposed of on 13.12.2019 observing as follows:

"On perusal of the aforesaid, it is revealed that while entertaining the original application, the Tribunal issued interim direction to accept the application forms of the candidates as per the amended notification dated 05.11.2018, but directed the Government not to announce the result of those candidates. In view of the foregoing, the argument advanced by the learned Government Pleader for Services appearing for the petitioners that they cannot declare the entire result appears to be fallacious. By way of the interim order, the Tribunal issued directions in favour of the applicants to accept their applications forms and not to declare their results after completion of selection process. There is no substance in the contentions of the learned Government Pleader. In that view of the matter, in our considered opinion, there are no grounds to interfere with the interim order passed by the Tribunal, by which the petitioners are not at all affected.

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed."

The government published the results by excluding the names of the

candidates, who attended the examination as per G.O.Ms.No.70 dated

05.11.2018; for the other subjects in the same post, other than the

School Assistants (Telugu) and the Language Pandits (Telugu), the

department has announced the results of the candidates, who were

having post graduate qualification also; in view of the pendency of the

matter before the Tribunal, now the eligible candidates, including the

petitioners are loosing their opportunity to get appointment; there are

only two applicants in OA No.2516 of 2018; petitioners are fully eligible

and qualified, who applied with Post Graduate degree and they got

better marks than the candidates whose marks lists were published by

the Department with B.A. (Telugu) qualification; due to the pendency

of the cases, the department has with held the results; in the earlier

DSC examination also, the respondents have framed rules to fill up the

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

vacancies in the category of School Assistants (Telugu) and Language

Pandits (LPs) and Post graduate degree in Telugu and B.Ed with Telugu

as methodology subject was considered for recruitment and that is why

the department has issued an amendment to G.O.Ms.No.67 dated

26.10.2018 by substituting the clause as 'Post Graduate Degree in

Telugu' is also eligible under G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018; when the

department is proceeding with the selection process, petitioners and

others have filed review petition i.e., IA No.1 of 2020 in WP No.19757

of 2019 and when the same is pending, government issued impugned

memo dated 20.05.2020 directing the DEO's to complete recruitment

process in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.10.2018;

G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 issued by the Government is not

cancelled or set aside and the candidates who have written

examination pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 were denied

the opportunity; the candidates who have filed OA are not even

qualified and the said OA has become infructuous and prays to set aside

the impugned memo dated 20.05.2020.

4. When the above matters came up for admission, an interim

order was passed by this Court in WP Nos.9118, 9164, 17367 and 17864

of 2020 not to fill up the posts equivalent to the petitioners.

5. Case of the petitioners in WP No.11961 of 2020 is that, they

have completed Bachelor's degree with Telugu as the main subject;

Government issued G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.10.2018 for Teacher

Recruitment Test, according to which, a candidate much posses a

bachelor's degree with Telugu as the main subject or one of the three

equal optional subjects or bachelor's degree in oriental language in

Telugu or its equivalent and B.Ed., with Telugu as Methodology subject

or Telugu Pandit Training or its equivalent; government has issued

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 making an amendment to G.O.Ms.No.67

dated 26.10.2018 by allowing the candidates, who possess Post

Graduate degree in Telugu even without possessing the subject Telugu

as a main subject at graduation level for selection and appointment to

the post of School Assistant (Telugu) and Language Pandit (Telugu)

depriving the rights of the qualified applicants; as per the merit list,

petitioners were selected and their names were included in the

provisional select list; as this Court in WP Nos.9118, 9164, 17367 and

17864 of 2010 passed interim orders not to fill up the posts against the

petitioners therein, the department has stalled the entire process even

though specific instructions were given to verify the certificates from

22.05.2020 to 26.05.2020 through online.

6. Counter-affidavits are filed in all the writ petitions by the 2nd

respondent, which are common, stating inter-alia, that in DSC-2014,

the qualification for the post of Language Pandit (Telugu) and School

Assistant (Telugu) is prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.38, School Education

Department dated 19.11.2014, according to which, a candidate must

possess a bachelor's degree with Telugu as the main subject or one of

the three equal optional subjects or bachelor's degree in Oriental

language in Telugu (BOL) or its equivalent and B.Ed., with Telugu as

Methodology subject or Telugu Pandit Training or its equivalent;

candidates who are having PG Degree in Telugu also made

representation to that effect and after considering the same,

G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 was issued amending the prescribed

qualification in G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.10.2018 by including the

qualification MA (Telugu) and Telugu Pandit Training course;

qualifications prescribed by the State vide G.O.Ms.No.70 dated

05.11.2018 are in strict consonance with NCTE Regulations; the

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

government has adopted the NCTE Regulations 2014, wherein PG and

B.Ed., from NCTE recognized institution is considered as one of the

essential qualification for the post of Teacher in High School; NCTE

regulations were adopted by the Government of Andhra Pradesh vide

G.O.Ms.No.38 dated 19.11.2014 and that G.O.Ms.No.70 dated

05.11.2018 was issued only to bring the qualification in conformity

with NCTE Regulations, 2014.

7. Reply-affidavit is filed by the petitioners in WP No.9164 of

2020, stating, inter-alia, that G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 is only

amendment to G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.10.2018 by inserting additional

qualification and by virtue of amended G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018,

the respondents permitted the PG candidates also to apply on par with

the unofficial respondents; it is for the authority to prescribe

educational qualifications for a particular post; by virtue of

G.O.Ms.No.70, petitioners and others who possessed PG qualification

also participated in the examination; even in DSE-2014, post-graduate

degree holders were held eligible; impleaded petitioners i.e.,

Respondents 3 to 37 cannot question the validity of G.O.Ms.No.70; as

per G.O.Ms.No.74 Education Department dated 20.09.2017, government

issued a notification in exercise of the powers under Article 309 of the

Constitution of India, according to which, the candidates possessing any

qualification equivalent to any higher qualification recognized by the

government or NCTE are also eligible for appointment in the service.

8. The impleaded respondents 3 to 37 have filed separate

petitions i.e., I.A.No.3 of 2020 in WP Nos.9118 and 9164 of 2020,

seeking to vacate the interim stay stating inter alia¸ that they have

passed the Bachelors degree with (Telugu), Bachelor of Oriental

Language (BOL) and some of them also completed B.Ed., and Telugu

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

Pandit Training Course and having fully eligible and qualified to hold

the post of School Assistant (Telugu) and Telugu Pandit; they have

made applications pursuant to the Notification dated 26.10.2018 for

teacher recruitment test in terms of G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.10.2018;

surprisingly, after ten days of the notification, government issued

another G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 allowing the candidates, who

are having Post Graduate Degree qualification as another alternative

qualification to the Post of School Assistant and Language Pandit; as

per rules issued in G.O.Ms.Nos.11 and 12, Education Department dated

23.01.2009, a candidate must possess a bachelor degree with Telugu

main subject or one of the three equal optional subjects or a P.G.

degree or an oriental title or its equivalent and B.Ed., with Telugu as

Methodology or pandit training or its equivalent, are alone are entitled

for the said posts; subsequently, the qualification of P.G. degree has

been deleted by issuing G.O.Ms.Nos.15 and 16 School Education

Department dated 07.02.2015; by following the existing service rules,

the government has issued notification dated 26.10.2018 calling for

applications for filling up of the posts of School Assistants and Language

Pandit; surprisingly, after 10 days of the notification, another

G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 was issued by the 1st respondent,

where under again the Post Graduate Degree qualification was added in

the manner of Executive instructions; Government filed a review

petition in WP No.19757 of 2019 and the same is pending; the

government realizing its mistake in issuing executive instructions vide

G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018, issued Memo dated 20.05.2020

directing the DEOs in the State to complete the recruitment process;

because of the interim orders, they are deprived of the posting order

and prays to vacate the interim orders.

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

9. The 2nd respondent filed vacate stay petitions in WP Nos.9118

and 9164 of 2020.

10. Sri Subbarao Korrapati, learned counsel for the petitioners in

WP No.9164 of 2020 submits that as G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 is

still in existence, the respondents ought not to have issued the

impugned memo dated 20.05.2020 directing the DEOs to conduct

counselling through online to the provisionally selected candidates for

certificates verification and to verify the same in accordance with

G.O.Ms.No.67 School Education Department dated 26.10.2018. He

further submits that when the review application is pending in WP

No.19757 of 2019, the respondents ought not to have issued the

impugned memo dated 20.05.2020. Learned counsel for the petitioners

in WP Nos.9164, 17367 and 17864 of 2020 adopted the arguments of Sri

Subbarao Korrapati. Sri A Rajendra Babu, learned counsel for the

petitioners in WP No.17864 of 2020 relied upon the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Government of India vs. Indian Tobacco

Association' in Appeal (Civil) No.5196 of 2005 and submits that the

word 'substitute' ordinarily would mean 'to put (one) in place of

another' or 'to replace' and that by reason of the aforesaid

substitution, no substantive right has been taken away. Sri T S Rayalu,

learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the applicants in OA

have become disqualified and hence, OA became infructuous. Sri

Bobbili Srinivas also strongly contended that the impugned memo has to

be set aside.

11. Mrs.M.L. Neelima, learned counsel for the petitioner in WP

No.11961 of 2020 submits that the government realized the mistake in

issuing G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 and issued Memo dated

20.05.2020 and in spite of issuing the memo, the respondents are not

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

proceeding to complete the recruitment process in accordance with

G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.10.2018.

12. Learned Additional Advocate General strongly contends that

G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 was issued only to bring the

qualifications in conformity with NCTE guidelines and that the

government has to necessarily follow the same and in support of his

contention, he relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in 'State of UP vs. Shiv Kumar Pathak1', 'State of UP vs. Anad

Kumar Yadav'2; 'State of UP vs. Bhupendra Nath Tripathi3', 'Dr. Preeti

Srivastyava vs State of MP4', 'Kalyani Mathivanan vs. K.V.Jeyharaj5' and

'Anand Yadav vs. State of UP6'.

13. According to G.O.Ms.No.70 School Education Department

dated 05.11.2018, the following amendment is substituted at para

4(2)(i)(f), which reads as under:

Para 4(2)(i)(f) shall be substituted as follows:

              Existing para                               Substituted with
Must possess a Bachelor's Degree with          Must possess a Bachelor's Degree with
Telugu as the main subject or one of           Telugu as the main subject or one of
the three equal optional subjects or           the three equal optional subjects or
Bachelor's     Degree     in Oriental          Bachelor's     Degree     in Oriental
language in Telugu (BOL) or its                language in Telugu (BOL) or its
equivalent and B.Ed., with Telugu as           equivalent or a Post Graduate Degree
methodology subject or Telugu Pandit           in Telugu and B.Ed., with Telugu as
Training or its equivalent.                    methodology subject or Telugu Pandit
                                               Training or its equivalent.

14. As seen from the above amendment, a person, who is having

Post Graduate Degree in Telugu and B.Ed. with Telugu as Methodology

subject or Telugu Pandit Training or its equivalent, is also eligible for

the said post. According to the counter-affidavit of the 2nd respondent,

(2018) 12 SCC 595

(2018)13 SCC 560

(2010) 13 SCC 203

(1999) 7 SCC 120

(2015) 6 SCC 363

Civil Appeal No.2850/2020 (2020) SCC online SC 823

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

the said amendment making Post Graduate Degree candidates also

eligible is in consonance with NCTE Act and the Regulations framed

therein. Admittedly, impleaded respondents did not challenge

G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 and they are only supporting the Memo

dated 20.05.2020, wherein, the government directed the DEOs to verify

the certificates as per G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.10.2018. When the

government amended the qualification and issued G.O.Ms.No.70 dated

05.11.2018, it ought not to have issued impugned memo directing the

DEOs to follow G.O.Ms.No.67 dated 26.10.2018, because G.O.Ms.No.70

dated 05.11.2018 is neither cancelled nor struck-off by any Court as on

today.

15. The issue as to whether recruitment process has to be

proceeded in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.67 or G.O.Ms.No.70 can only

be decided in OA No.2516 of 2018. As the said OA is still pending and as

there is an interim direction not to declare the results of the

candidates, who applied pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.70, the results of the

candidates cannot be declared at this stage. It is relevant to mention

herein that the writ petition filed by the government challenging the

interim order of the Tribunal was dismissed. However, an interlocutory

application has been filed seeking review of the said order. Unless the

said order is reviewed or OA No.2516 of 2018 itself is disposed of, the

respondents cannot proceed with the selection. Even though there are

only two applicants in the OA, who according to petitioner become

ineligible, the respondents cannot proceed with the selection.

Ultimately, if the OA is allowed, all the Post Graduate degree holders

who applied pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.70 would become disqualified. On

the other hand, if the OA is dismissed, all the candidates who are

having Post Graduate degrees and who applied pursuant to

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

G.O.Ms.No.70 would become eligible. As there is an interim direction

not to declare the results of the candidates who applied pursuant to

G.O.Ms.No.70 and as the writ petition filed by the Government is

dismissed, the said order of the Tribunal holds the field as on today. As

the respondents already filed a review petition seeking review of the

orders in the writ petition, the selection process will depend on the

orders in review petition.

16. Even though the learned Additional Advocate General

strongly contends and submits that the respondents may be allowed to

proceed with selections by leaving the posts unfilled for the petitioners

basing on G.O.Ms.No.70, the same cannot be granted during the

pendency of O.A. or till the order is modified in review petition.

17. In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, WP

Nos.9118, 9164, 17367 and 17864 of 2020 are allowed setting aside the

impugned Memo dated 20.05.2020 issued by the 2nd respondent, as the

same is contrary to G.O.Ms.No.70 dated 05.11.2018 and as the I.A. No.1

of 2020 in WP No.19757 of 2019 which is filed seeking review of the

order and O.A. No.2516 of 2018 are still pending. However, no direction

as sought for in WP No.11961 of 2020 can be granted, as the impugned

memo dated 20.05.2020 itself is struck off by this Court in the other

writ petitions and accordingly, the said writ petition is dismissed. No

order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in all the

above writ petitions, shall stand closed.

_________________________ KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI, J

Date: 25.03.2021 Note: Furnish CC in one week.

(BO) BSS

KVL, J WP Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 & 17864 of 2020

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Writ Petition Nos.9118, 9164, 11961, 17367 and 17864 of 2020

Date: 25.03.2021 BSS