Telangana High Court
Telangana State Public Service ... vs K.Devika on 26 October, 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.Nos.533, 466, 468, 478, 485, 493, 494, 496, 497, 498, 499,
501, 502, 505, 506, 509, 532, 535, 536 and 544 of 2021
COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)
The present writ appeals are arising out of a common order
passed in W.P.No.9626 of 2019 and batch dated 24.06.2021.
The facts of the case reveal that various notifications were
issued from time to time by the Public Service Commission, State
of Telangana, and the selected lists were forwarded to the State
Government for issuing consequential appointment orders. The
details of various advertisements, which were subject matter of
various writ petitions, are reproduced as under:-
"TELANGANA STATE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION: HYDERABAD
Rule 6A Common Orders Disposed on the following WP's dated:24/06/2021 in
various Recruitments
S. W.P. NO.(S) Filing Date Name of the Notificatio Post Applied Unit List Recruitment
No Petitioner n No. Status
1. WP.No.9626/ 29/04/2019 M. Swathi 14/2017 TGT (Science) 12/06/2019 Final Results
2019 in REIS Declared on
12/02/2019.
2. WP.No.12700 24/06/2019 K. Devika 55/2017 School Asst. 03/04/2019 Final Results
/2019 (Physical Declared on
Education) in 19/01/2019
TRT
3. WP.No.14590 15/07/2019 D. Rajini & 54/2017 Lang. Pandit 28/03/2019, Final Results
/2019 10 others (Telugu) in 03/02/2020, Declared on
TRT 03/02/2021 22/04/2021
&
03/05/2021
4. W.P.3356/20 17/02/2020 K.Suryakal 54/2017 Lang. Pandit 28/03/2019, Final Results
20 a (Telugu) in 03/02/2020, Declared on
TRT 03/02/2021 22/04/2021
&
03/05/2021
5. WP.No.19222 03/09/2019 Kore Anjali 52/2017 School Asst.- 02/12/2020 Final Results
/2019 & Vislavath Social Declared on
Sravanthi Studies (T/M) 22/04/2021
6. WP.No.19242 03/09/2019 P. Shiva 54/2017 School 28/03/2019, Final Results
/2019 Kumar Assistants - 03/02/2020, Declared on
Telugu- 03/02/2021 03/07/2020
52/2017 & &
(Language 03/05/2021 22/04/2020
Pandit -
Telugu)
7. WP.No.19848 03/09/2019 G.Ramesh 52/2017 School Asst. 04/05/2021 Final Results
/2019 - Social Declared on
Studies 22/04/2021
2
8. WP.No.19278 03/09/2019 Kondrapall 52/2017 School Asst. 03/02/2021 Final Results
/2019 y Srinu - Physical Declared on
Science 19/01/2021
9. WP.No.19337 03/09/2019 D.Damodar 52/2017 School Asst. 17/08/2020 Final Results
/2019 Reddy - Biological Declared on
Science 03/07/2020
10. WP.No.20566 16/09/2019 Syed 53/2017 SGT (Urdu 08/06/2020 Final Results
/2019 Jamey Medium) in Declared on
TRT 27/05/2020
11. WP.No.1434/ 23/01/2020 A.Shailaja 53/2017 SGT in TRT 30/03/2021 Final Results
2020 & 23 others Declared on
16/03/2021
12. W.P.1884/20 29/01/2020 V. 08/2018 H.W.O.Grade 07/01/2020 Final Results
20 Jangaiah -2 Declared on
30/12/2019
04/01/2020
13. W.P.5456/20 10/03/2020 Alreddy 7/2018 HWO 06/01/2020 Final Results
20 Ramadevi Declared on
30/12/2019
04/01/2020
14. W.P.No.9911/ 03/07/2020 Ch. 7/2018 Hostel 06/01/2020 Final Results
2020 Koteswar Welfare Declared on
Rao Officer 30/12/2019
04/01/2020
15. W.P.No.8198 11/06/2020 G.Srikanth 20/2017 Librarian 14/09/2019 Final Results
of 2020 (School) in Declared on
REIS 27/08/2019
16. WP.No.24159 28/12/2020 A.Uday 20/2017 Librarian 14/09/2019 Final Results
/2020 Kumar (School) in Declared on
REIS 27/08/2019
17. WP.No.13039 14/08/2020 Gankidi 20/2017 Librarian (Jr. 14/09/2019 Final Results
/2020 Padma college) & Declared on
(Lib.Schools) 27/08/2019
in REIS
18. WP.No.13074 14/08/2020 Swetha 20/2017 Librarian 14/09/2019 Final Results
/2020 Thota (School) in Declared on
REIS 27/08/2019
19. WP.No.13887 24/08/2020 B.Ashok 12/2018 Mandal 25/07/2019 Final Results
/2020 Kumar Planning/AS Declared on
O 22/07/2019
20. W.P.No.9840/ 02/07/2020 Vanda 23/2018 Processing 28/03/2019 Final Results
2020 Chandana Supervisor Declared on
05/10/2019
The petitioners came up before this court stating that they
were selected in the process of selection. However, their names
have not been forwarded to the State Government for appointment
against the vacancies advertised and the respondents have not
followed Rule 6(A) of the Telangana State Public Service
Commission Rules (for short 'the Rules'). The learned Single Judge
has allowed the writ petitions and has held that the
respondent/Public Service Commission is under obligation to
follow the statutory provisions as contained in Rule 6(A) of the
Rules.
Paragraph 9 of the order passed by the learned Single Judge
reads as under:-
"9. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made
by learned counsel for the respective parties, is of the considered
view that since the issue raised in these writ petitions is squarely
covered by the judgments rendered by this Court in W.P.No.7117 of
2020 dated 11.08.2020 and W.P.No.4495 of 2019 dated
11.06.2019 and as confirmed vide judgment dated 03.07.2019 in
W.A.No.551 of 2019, these writ petitions can be disposed of
directing the Public Service Commission and the State Government
to fill up all the unfilled vacancies strictly by following Rule 6(A) of
the Telangana State Public Service Commission Rules. It is made
clear that the vacancies, which were relinquished by the selected
candidates, after giving appointment orders, those vacancies have
to be tagged on to the next recruitment notification and the
vacancies, which are still lying vacant even after issuance of
appointment orders, those vacancies are to be filled up strictly by
following Rule 6(A) of the Telangana State Public Service
Commission Rules and the same should be offered to the next
meritorious candidates in the order of merit."
Learned counsel appearing for the Telangana State Public
Service Commission has argued before this court that so far as the
learned Single Judge has directed the Public Service Commission
and the State Government to follow Rule 6(A) of the Rules, there is
no quarrel about it. However, his contention is that in case after
issuance of appointment order, if a person has not joined the post,
then it has to be carried forward to the next recruitment
notification and the same post cannot be filled up by the process of
selection, which is the subject matter of the writ petitions.
Rule 6(A) of the Rules is reproduced as under:-
"6-A: Notwithstanding anything contained in adhoc Rule issued in
G.O.Ms.No.544, G.A(Ser.A) Department, Dated : 04.12.1998, any
candidate whose name has been included in a selection list in a
direct recruitment prepared by the Commission, on enquiry by the
Commission, may relinquish his claim for appointment in writing in
the proforma prescribed by the Commission. The Commission shall
thereupon remove the name of such candidates from the selection
list and select any other candidate according to rules. The
candidate whose name has been so removed from the selection list
shall be informed of such removal by the Commission and shall
have no right for the said appointment in future with reference to
the said selection.
Provided this provision is applicable only when a single
category of posts is notified in a notification and not applicable to a
notification where multiple categories of posts are notified.
However, it shall be ensured that the list shall not be operated for
any additional vacancies indented by the Government
Departments. The selection list for the purpose of selecting
candidates in place or relinquished candidate/candidates shall be
operated only till the next notification is issued or for a period of
one year, whichever is earlier."
Learned counsel appearing for the Telangana State Public
Service Commission has argued before this court that they have
complied with the statutory provisions as contained in Rule 6(A) of
the Rules and the same has seriously been disputed by the other
side.
Whether compliance of Rule 6-A of the Rules has been done
or not has to be looked into in each and every individual case. The
learned Single Judge has also gone to the extent in holding that
the vacancies which are lying even after issuance of appointment
orders, meaning thereby on account of non-joining of the
candidates, are to be filled up in accordance with Rule 6(A) of the
Rules. However, Rule 6 of the Rules provides that in case a
candidate does not join pursuant to issuance of appointment
order, the fallout vacancies, if any, due to relinquishment and non-
joining of selected candidates shall be notified in the next
recruitment. Therefore, to that extent, the order passed by the
learned Single Judge is contrary to the statutory provisions as
contained in Rule 6 of the Rules.
Resultantly, the order passed by the learned Single Judge is
set aside. The matter is remanded back to the writ court to deal
with each and every individual writ petition, in order to give a
finding of fact whether Rule 6(A) of the Rules has been complied
with or not. The parties shall appear before the learned Single
Judge on 29.10.2021. The learned Single Judge is requested to
decide the matters as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a
period of thirty days from today, keeping in view the fact that the
petitioners are running against time and by efflux of time, their
right to the post will come to an end.
With the aforesaid, the Writ Appeals stand disposed of.
The miscellaneous applications pending in this writ appeal,
if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ
___________________________
A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J
26.10.2021
JSU
