Katuka Sreenu vs The State Of Telangana
2021 Latest Caselaw 3529 Tel

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3529 Tel
Judgement Date : 17 November, 2021

Telangana High Court

Katuka Sreenu vs The State Of Telangana on 17 November, 2021

Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, A.Rajasheker Reddy

  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                               AND
              THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

                                 W.A.No.308 of 2020

JUDGMENT:        (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)



        The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated

20.08.2020

passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P.No.13328 of

2020.

The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the appellant

before this court was appointed on contractual basis, he was

absorbed also as Artisan Grade-II, and he is working on the

aforesaid post. A Recruitment Notification was issued on

28.09.2019 for the post of Junior Lineman. It was an open

competition and the appellant did apply pursuant to the

Notification dated 28.09.2019. He has secured 24 marks. The

facts further reveal that in the application form, the District

mentioned by the appellant is Mahabubnagar District. 5% of the

posts were reserved for non-locals of Nagarkurnool District and as

per the option submitted by him, he was treated as a non-local for

consideration in Nagarkurnool District. He realised the mistake

only after the process of selection was over and the final merit list

was published. At that stage, he wanted to change the entries

made in the application form. The learned Single Judge has

dismissed the writ petition.

Paragraphs 5 to 9 of the order passed by the learned Single

Judge read as under:-

"5. At page No.27 of the material papers of writ petition, photocopy of application submitted by the petitioner is enclosed. In the said application, against the school education details,

district was entered as Mahabubnagar. He has disclosed prosecution of his education from 1st class to 7th class in Mahabubnagar District. Above this column, against education details in the column against 'local district you belong', petitioner has entered as Mahabubnagar District and against the column 'Circle/District Name', he mentioned as Nagarkurnool and agreed to consider him against 5% vacancies only.

6. Further, at no point of time before results were announced, petitioner sought for rectification of declaration given by him, assuming that under the mistaken impression said declaration was given. Petitioner kept quiet for the entire selection process to be completed and only for the first time on 29.07.2020, he made representation claiming that he should be considered as local candidate in Nagarkurnool District.

7. Since selections are already finalized and merit list is published, at this stage, if the request of the petitioner is accepted, it would amount to re-drawing the merit lit, may have cascading effect and may result in deleting the name of another candidate to accommodate the petitioner. Thus, the relief granted to the petitioner would have impact on employment opportunity of others. Therefore, even assuming that there is bona fide mistake and equitable relief can be granted to the petitioner, granting of said relief to the petitioner would result in more severe consequences.

8. More so, on account of declaration of merit list and inclusion of name of another person, right to secure employment has crystallized in that person and any direction issued to re- draw the merit list to include the name of petitioner will take away the right accrued to that person and may have a cascading effect. Therefore, relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted at this stage.