Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Kondatamara Uma Maheshwara Rao vs The State Of Ap on 8 July, 2022

          THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO

     WRIT PETITION Nos.23976 + 23855 and 24270 of 2020

COMMON ORDER:

      Writ Petition No. 23976 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, claiming the following relief:


      ".....Issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of
      writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents,

in not considering the candidature of the petitioners for appointment as Secondary Grade Teacher (Telugu), notified vide Notification No. 768/TRC-1/2018, dated 26.10.2018, in the guise of non-submission of Nativity (Agency Area) Certificate of petitioner's forefathers in proof of their nativity and pass such other orders.

Writ Petition No.23855 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, claiming the following relief:

".....Issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents, in not considering the candidature of the petitioners for appointment as Secondary Grade Teacher (Telugu), notified vide Notification No. 768/TRC-1/2018, dated 26.10.2018, in the guise of non-submission of Nativity (Agency Area) Certificate of petitioner's forefathers in proof of their nativity and pass such other orders.

Writ Petition No.24270 of 2020 is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, claiming the following relief:

".....Issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents, in not considering the candidature of the petitioners for appointment as Secondary Grade Teacher (Telugu), notified vide Notification No. 768/TRC-1/2018, dated 26.10.2018, in the guise of non-submission of Nativity (Agency Area) Certificate of petitioner's forefathers in proof of their nativity and pass such other orders.

2. Since the facts and issue involved in both the writ petitions

is one and the same, I find it expedient to decide both the matters by

common order.

3. For the sake of convenience, W.P.No. 23976 of 2020 is taken

as leading case.

4. Heard Mr. T.S.V.L. Narasimha Swamy, learned counsel for

the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Services-III for

the respondents.

5. The brief case of the petitioners in W.P.No. 23976 of 2020 is

that they are Schedule Tribe community and possess D.El.Ed

(Diploma in Elementary Education) and D.Ed (Diploma in Education).

The 2nd respondent issued Notification No. 768/TRC-1/2018, dated

26.10.2018 for the post of Secondary Grade Teachers (SGTs). As the

petitioners were eligible, they applied for the said post. The

petitioners have undergone all their education in Scheduled Areas

(Agency Areas) in Vizianagaram District and they have been residing

there since time immemorial. The petitioners were asked to submit

the Local Schedule Area Certificate from 50 years, but the Revenue

Authorities have not been issuing the same, therefore the selection

for DSC-2018 was stalled at the stage of certificate verification. The

petitioners made representation by explaining the above said reasons

to the revenue authorities, but in vain. The petitioners obtained list of

Habitations Mandal wise in Vizianagaram District, among them are

the areas included where the petitioners are residing since

generations together. But the respondents failed to consider the

same, which is illegal and arbitrary. Hence this writ petition came to

be filed.

6. Per contra, the respondents 1 to 4 filed counter by denying all

material averments made in the writ affidavit and mainly contended

that pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.67 SE (Exams) Department, dated

26.10.2018 issued by the Government, the 2nd respondent issued

notification dated 26.10.2018 for filling up 6397 vacant teacher posts

of all categories in the state and 186 SGT posts notified in

Vizianagaram District as per notification. As per Rule 19(v) and (vi) of

G.O.Ms.No.67 SE (Exams) Department, dated 26.10.2018, local

scheduled tribe candidates shall only be considered for selection and

appointment against the vacancies in scheduled areas. They shall

also be considered for selection to the posts notified in plain area, if

they come up for selection. As per list furnished by the Project Officer,

ITDA, Parvatipuram vide letter dated 07.09.2015, the villages where

the petitioners are said to be residing not covered in the notified

scheduled area in Vizianagaram District as notified scheduled area in

Vizianagaram District as notified in the 5th Schedule of the

Constitution of India. The Tahsildars concerned are to be certified the

villages which are notified in Schedule Area and which do not notified

in scheduled area and accordingly they are issuing the Scheduled

Area Certificates to the each and every candidate of such scheduled

area that is why the schedule area certificates are not issued to the

petitioners. The petitioners have not produced the scheduled area

certificate, their candidature is not considered for selection against

the notified posts under Scheduled Area in TET-cum-TRT-2018

teacher recruitment, which was completed as per the schedule given

by the respondents 1 and 2. The petitioners stood at general merit list

of ST candidates, thus they are not come under selection zone in the

ST reserved posts in plain area. Therefore the petitioners are not

entitled to claim relief in the writ petition and requested to dismiss

the same.

7. The petitioners filed reply affidavit against the counter

affidavit filed by the respondents 1 to 4 by denying the material

averments made in the counter affidavit and contended that

G.O.Ms.No.3, dated 10.01.2020 issued by the 1st respondent has been

interdicted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.

3609 of 2002 and batch and the G.O was set aside as being arbitrary

by its Judgment dated 22.04.2020. Therefore the G.O.Ms.No.3 dated

10.02.2020 is not maintainable, which is against the judgment of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court. Since the concerned Tahsildar refused to

issue Agency Area Certificates, the petitioners have not produced the

same at the time of provisional selection. But the cases of petitioners

will have to be considered along with other candidates, on merits, by

taking into consideration the nativity certificates and caste certificates

produced by them, which gives the details of residential areas of the

petitioners and if their residential areas are notified as agency areas,

their cases will have to be considered as local ST candidate from the

agency areas and not plain areas. This Court considering the said

facts directed the respondents to keep the posts vacant for the

petitioners during pendency of the writ petition.

8. During hearing, learned Government Pleader would contend

that as per Rule 19(d) (xxiii) of the proceedings issued by the 2nd

respondent vide proceedings in Rc.No.ESE02-20021/6/2018-

Recdtmt-CSE, dated 14.06.2019 it is specified that if the certificate in

the provisional selection list is not found to be genuine, if he/ she

fails to produce the requisite certificates at the time of verification or

is absent for verification of certificates, such candidate shall not be

selected and will forego the right for selection.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the

decision of the Division Bench of this Court in "S. Vijay Kumar Vs.

District Educational Officer and Others"1 wherein it was held as

follows:

"8. The petitioner was born and brought up in Utnoor and his education was at that place. After verifying the relevant records, the Mandal Revenue Officer issued a caste, nativity and date of birth certificate, dated 28.05.2001 prescribed under the Act and the Rules. None of the respondents had doubted the genuinity of that certificate. Strictly speaking, in view of the certificate referred to above, there was no necessity for the petitioner to submit any other certificate in proof of his nativity. Since the notification mandates that a separate 'certificate of proof of local scheduled tribe community' has to be submitted, the petitioner obtained such a certificate on 03.02.2006. That certificate was doubted by the DSC and it was referred to the 2nd respondent".

10. As seen from the decision of Division Bench of this Court, it

is made clear that there is no necessity to submit any other certificate

in proof of his nativity. In the case of the petitioners the petitioners

have produced nativity certificates and caste certificates at the time of

provisional selection to the respondent authorities, but they failed to

consider the same and insisted the petitioners to obtain Nativity

(Agency Area) Certificate from the concerned Tahsildars, which they

are not furnished. Therefore the petitioners have not produced such

certificate.

11. Following the decision of S. Vijay Kumar's Case this Court

feels that there is no need or necessity to furnish Nativity (Agency

Area) Certificate from the concerned Tahsildars. Moreover, the

petitioners have furnished nativity certificates and caste certificates

etc., would speak the volume that the petitioners are residents of

Agency Area respectively since times immemorial, which is not

2013 LawSuit (AP) 752

disputed by the respondent authorities, but insisting Nativity (Agency

Area) Certificate separately. Therefore this Court feels that the

petitioners have submitted sufficient required documents as per

notification, which is sufficient and no need to expect further

certificates.

12. This Court passed an interim direction dated 29.12.2020,

which reads as follows:

"Therefore I find that it is a fit case to direct the respondents to keep the post vacant for these petitioners during pendency of this petition, as an interim measure.

However, this order will not confer any right on the petitioner to claim appointment as a matter of routine and it depends upon the result in the main writ petition in W.P.No.23976 of 2020".

13. It is undisputed fact that as per directions of this Court, the

respondent authorities have kept the post vacant for these petitioners.

Therefore this Court feels that the petitioners are eligible for the posts

of Secondary Grade Teachers (Telugu) notified under Notification No.

768/TRC-1/2018, dated 26.10.2018 and keeping in view of the post

kept vacant for these petitioners, the respondents are directed to

consider the candidature of the petitioners for appointment as

Secondary Grade Teachers (Telugu) as per the notification stated

supra without insisting the petitioners to produce Nativity (Agency

Area) Certificate further in the matter, within a period of six (06)

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

14. With the above direction, the above three Writ Petitions are