Telangana High Court

Nigulapu Mounika vs The District Collector And 2 ... on 31 January, 2023

Bench: K. Sarath

       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH

          WRIT PETITION No.6930 of 2020

ORDER:

This Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of

Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

"....to issue of Writ Mandamus declaring that the action of the 1st respondent in taking steps to issue posting/appointment orders to the Respondent No.3 for the post of Junior Assistant under S.C category in pursuance of Notification of the 1st respondent in Ref.No.A2/240/2013 dated 20.06.2018 for appointment of Junior Assistants/Typist in T.S. Ministerial Services Subordinate Services for limited recruitment of backlog vacancies of SC & ST in the District of Adilabad without submitting Pass Certificate/Degree Certificate at the time of submission of application and in violation of condition 2 (b) of Annexure-I of the Notification dated 20.06.2018 and set aside the final selection list dated 07.03.2020 selecting the Respondent No.3 as Junior Assistant and consequently direct the 1st respondent to issue posting orders/appointment orders to the petitioner as Junior Assistant in view of the provisional selection list......"

SK,J W.P.No.6930 of 2020

2. Heard Sri B.Sudhakar Reddy, Learned Counsel

appearing for the petitioner and Government Pleader

for Services-II appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2

and Sri Santapur Satyanrayana Rao, learned Counsel

appearing for the respondent No.3.

3. The Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that the 1st respondent issued notification

vide Collector's Ref. No.A2/240/2015 dated

20.06.2018 for the appointment of Junior

Assistants/Typist in T.S Ministerial Services,

Subordinate Services for limited recruitment of backlog

vacancies of SC & STs in the District of Adilabad. In

pursuance to the said notification the petitioner

applied for the post of Junior Assistant as she possess

requisite qualifications as prescribed in the

notification. After due process of selection the

respondent No.1 provisionally selected the petitioner

SK,J W.P.No.6930 of 2020

on 01.02.2020 under SC Women Quota at Serial No.3

and the same was also displayed on the Notice Board

of the 1st respondent. Thereafter, the 1st respondent

issued another Provisional Common List of Junior

Assistants and Typist under SC/ST Backlog-2018,

wherein the respondent No.3 is placed at Sl.No.789

though the respondent No.3 did not submit any

certificates of Technical qualifications and mentioned

in the remarks column that only degree certificate is

filed. In the remarks column of the respondent No.3 at

Sl.No.1326 of Provisional List reflects as 'year wise and

computer generated marks memo enclosed", but the

column of total marks and marks obtained does not

show the marks at all.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner further

submits that the respondent No.3 has not passed

degree examination as on the date of notification as

SK,J W.P.No.6930 of 2020

per 2 (b) of Annexure-I of the application for

recruitment to the posts of Junior Assistant and

Typist in T.S. Ministerial Services. Contrary to the said

provision the respondent No.1 taken steps to issue

appoint order to the Respondent No.3 by deleting the

name of the petitioner, and requested to set aside the

final selection list dated 07.03.2020 and consequently

direct the respondents 1 and 2 issue appointment

order to the petitioner as Junior Assistant in view of

provisional selection list of Junior Assistant for SC/ST

category and requested to allow the writ petition.

5. The Learned Government Pleader for Services-II

basing on the counter submits that as per the

condition set by the notification, the respondent No.3

is eligible as on the date of notification for being

appointed as Junior Assistant as her particulars are in

compliance with the requirements of the notification

SK,J W.P.No.6930 of 2020

and accordingly she was placed in the Provisional

Final Selection list by replacing the petitioner. The

application of the respondent No.3 is not in violation of

condition No.2 (b) of Annexure. The remarks 'year-

wise and computer generated marks memo enclosed'

against her name in the provisional list dated

01.02.2020 has nothing to with her non-compliance

with condition No.2 (b), this is because as per the

documents submitted by the respondent No.3 she

has appeared for her degree final year exam in the

month of March/April, 2018 and she has received her

consolidated Degree Marks Memo, which is dated

22.06.2018. Though this date is just after the cutoff

date of notification which is 20.06.2018 it is mentioned

in the consolidated Memo of Marks that the final year

examination was conducted in the month of

March/April, 2018 and requested to dismiss the writ

petition.

SK,J W.P.No.6930 of 2020

6. Sri Santhapur Satyanarayana Rao, Learned

Counsel appearing for respondent No.3 submits the

respondent No.1/District Collector, Aliabad issued

notification under Group-IV Services and the

applications were to be submitted from 20.06.2018 to

04.07.2018 and the merit in the qualifying exam is the

criteria for appointment. The Respondent No.3 got

87.27% marks and she is the No.1 candidate in the

merit list. The merit list was prepared and the name of

the Respondent No.3 was shown against 13.26 and

the last column under the remarks it is stated ' years

wise computer generated marks memo enclosed".

7. The learned Counsel for the Respondent No.3

submitted that the Respondent No.3 enclosed year

wise marks memo and computer generated marks

memo of 3 years and it is sufficient that the

Respondent No.3 possessed degree qualification and

SK,J W.P.No.6930 of 2020

due to mistake on the part of the authorities the total

marks and percentage of marks of the Respondent

No.3 were not reflected, as such on 05.02.2020 the

Respondent No.3 made application stating that since

against her name marks were not shown in spite of

submitting year-wise marks memos, once again she

has submitted consolidated memo for three years and

the provisional certificate. It is further submitted that

the selection was made basing on the merit and it is

not the case of the Respondent No.3 that she has not

acquired degree qualification even on the last date of

notification dated 04.07.2018.

8. The learned Counsel for the Respondent No.3

further submitted that the Respondent No.3 got

provisional certificate on 22.06.2018 issued by the

Shathavahana University and also got consolidated

Marks Memo for three years on the same day and as

SK,J W.P.No.6930 of 2020

such the Respondent No.3 cannot be treated as a

person disqualified. As per Clause-2 of Annexure-I the

Respondent No.3 has given all the information about

passing degree by producing year-wise pass Marks

Memo and consolidated Memos for three years,

therefore the question of treating the Respondent No.3

as disqualified does not arise as she got highest marks

in the entire selection and requested to dismiss the

petition.

9. The learned Counsel for Respondent No.3 in

support of his contentions relied on the following

citations:

1. Dr.M.V.Nair Vs. Union of India and others1.

2. Rakesh Kumar Sharma Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and others2.

1(1993) 2 SCC 429

1(2013) 11 SCC 58

SK,J W.P.No.6930 of 2020

10. After hearing both sides and after perusing the

records, this Court is of the considered view that, as

per Clause (2) (b) and (d) of Notification, the

applications in which any portion of the required

information is not correctly and completely given will

be summarily rejected, and the applications in respect

of which prescribed documents and certificates in

proper form is received after the due date will be

summarily rejected.

11. If there is no specific date in the notification,

Rule-12 (3) (a) of Telangana State and Subordinate

Service Rules, 1996 will apply to any recruitment

including the impugned notification also.

Rule-12 (3) (a) of Telangana State and

Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 as follows:

The minimum General Educational Qualifications

wherever referred to in these or special rules shall be the

qualifications prescribed in Schedule-II of these rules.

SK,J W.P.No.6930 of 2020

3 (a) Should possess the academic qualifications and

experience prescribed, if any, on the date of notification for

Direct Recruitment.

12. Admittedly, in the instant case the Respondent

No.3 has acquired requisite qualification on

22.06.2018 and the Notification was issued by the

respondent No.1 on 20.06.2018 and in view of Rule

12 (3) (a) of Telangana State and Subordinate Service

Rules, 1996, the Respondent No.3 was not eligible to

the post as on the date of notification. Therefore, the

judgments relied on by the learned Counsel for the

respondent No.3 do not apply to the instant case, as

there is a specific provision in the Telangana State

and Subordinate Service Rules that as on the date of

Notification for direct recruitment should possess