E Surendar vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2305 Tel

      THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI

                WRIT PETITION NO.46818 OF 2022

                               ORDER

In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is seeking a Writ of Mandamus

declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent on the representation made

by the petitioner dt.10.01.2022 to consider his candidature for the vacant

post of Stipendiary Cadet Trainee (SCT) Sub Inspector of Police (Civil)

under Police Executive (PE) under SC category which was the result of

the cancellation of provisional selection of one candidate in the same

category due to pending criminal cases against him, as bad, unjust,

illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and consequently to direct the 2nd

respondent to consider his candidature and to pass such orders as this

Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition are

that the respondents have issued a Notification vide RC.No.89/

Rect./Admin-1/2018 dt.31.05.2018 for recruitment of SCT SIP (Civil).

The petitioner participated in the same and qualified in all phases of

selection process including physical efficiency test and appeared for W.P.No.46818 of 2022

final written examination and secured 228 marks. Thus, the petitioner

was selected for the post of SCT RSI in the 2018 Notification. The

petitioner had given preference in the following order:

(1) Post Code 11 - SCT SI (Civil)

(2) Post Code 12 - SCT RSI (AR)

(3) Post Code 14 - SCT RSI (TSSP)

The petitioner was sent for training as SCT RSI (AR) which started on

24.01.2020.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cut-off

mark for ST Police Executive (PE) candidates for the post of SCT Sub-

Inspector of Police (Civil) is 229 and the petitioner had secured 228

marks and therefore, he lost the opportunity by one mark and he is the

next candidate to be selected in PE category. It is submitted that while

the petitioner was in the training of Reserved Sub-Inspector of Police

(AR) in the month of July, 2020, he came to know that the candidate

who was selected for the post of Sub Inspector of Police (Civil) was not

considered due to criminal cases pending against him. Therefore, the

petitioner made a representation dt.10.01.2022 to consider his W.P.No.46818 of 2022

candidature against the post of SCT S.I. (Civil) as he is the next eligible

candidate. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

respondents have not passed any orders on the representation of the

petitioner.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of The Telangana State Level Police

Recruitment Board and another Vs. Narimetla Vamshi and others 1

has considered that a large number of candidates do not join the posts

after the selection process is concluded and those posts are not filled by

persons who had participated in the selection process, but the resultant

vacancies would be carried forward to the next selection process, and

observed that the public employment is an important source of

employability for the young people in the country and has reaffirmed the

findings of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Munja Praveen

and others Vs. State of Telangana and others 2 that the fall out

vacancies, if any, due to relinquishment or non-joining, cannot be filled

in on the basis of waiting list or by operating the merit list downward.

After considering the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has

Civil Appeal No(s).4735/2022 dt.23.11.2022

(2017) 14 SCC 797 W.P.No.46818 of 2022

held that if a candidate has not gone through the process of recruitment,

he has not done what was required to be done by him, it cannot be

construed as a vacancy arising which has to be carried forward to the

next recruitment process and as to the consequences of the large number

of vacancies which remained on these different counts, the process of

recruitment is not frustrated by non-filling up of the vacancies.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance

upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.

Ashok Vs. The State of Telangana and others 3, wherein after

considering the decision in the case of Munja Praveen and others Vs.

State of Telangana and others (2 supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court

has held that the appellant therein is entitled for the post of Sub-

Inspector of Police (Civil) and necessary orders were directed to be

passed forthwith to facilitate the appellant to join the training for the

said post as the training is scheduled for 23.01.2023 and the order is

dated 09.01.2023.

6. Learned Special Government Pleader for Home, however,

submitted that the vacancy, which the petitioner is seeking consideration

Civil Appeal No.209/2023 dt.09.01.2023 W.P.No.46818 of 2022

for, is a vacancy which has to be carried forward and cannot be filled up

by the next below candidate. He submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of Vallampati Sathish Babu Vs. State of Andhra

Pradesh and others 4 has held that there is no provision for preparation

of a waiting list as it is not permissible as per Sub-Rule (5) of Rule 16 of

the Andhra Pradesh Direct Recruitment for the post of Teachers

(Scheme of Selection) Rules, 2012 therein and therefore, the appellant

therein cannot claim appointment in the unfilled vacancy being the next

below candidate in the merit list. He has also placed reliance upon the

decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Narimetla

Vamshi and others Vs. V.V. Srinivasa Rao 5, wherein it was held that

the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme in the case of The Telangana

State Level Police Recruitment Board and another Vs. Narimetla

Vamshi and others (1 supra) is applicable only to those people who

approached the Court and not to those people who did not approach in

time. He has also placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Karunesh

2022 SCC OnLine SC 470

Contempt Petition (Civil) No.728/2023 in Civil Appeal No.4735/2022 dt.17.05.2023 W.P.No.46818 of 2022

Kumar and others 6 for the proposition that where there is no provision

for preparing a waiting list, then the next meritorious candidates in the

fall out vacancies cannot be appointed.

7. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on

record, this Court finds that the recruitment process gets completed as

soon as the provisional selection list is published and such candidates

are sent for training. The petitioner was sent for training on 24.01.2020,

whereas the last candidate under ST PE Civil who got 229 marks, i.e.,

N.Sudhakar, was found to have been involved in criminal cases and

therefore, his provisional selection was cancelled vide orders

dt.31.07.2021. As submitted by the learned Special Government Pleader

for Home, there is no provision for maintaining a waiting list as per

G.O.Ms.No.544, General Administration (Ser.A) Department,

dt.04.12.1998, wherein it is mentioned that maintenance and operation

of waiting list for all the recruitments shall be dispensed with and the list

of candidates approved/selected in any recruitment by any recruiting

agency in the State in any department for such posts shall be equal to the

number of vacancies notified for that recruitment only including those

2022 SCC OnLine SC 1706 W.P.No.46818 of 2022

meant for reserved community/category notified by the Unit Officers.

The fall out vacancies, if any, due to relinquishment and non-joining,

etc., of selected candidates shall be notified in the next recruitment.

Further as per Rule 15 of the Telangana SCT Rules issued vide

G.O.Ms.No.14, Home (Legal) Department, dt.08.04.2022, there shall be

no waiting list for any of the recruitment process conducted by TSLPRB

and the fall out vacancies, if any, due to cancellation of provisional

selection for any reasons including adverse antecedents, lack of medical

fitness, relinquishment by the candidates and non-joining of the

Induction Training as per designated procedure etc., of the provisionally

selected candidates shall be deemed to lapse for that recruitment. The

petitioner has not challenged the Telangana SCT Rules nor

G.O.Ms.No.544, General Administration (Ser.A) Department,

dt.04.12.1998. Therefore, in the absence of any provision, the request of

the petitioner cannot be entertained.

8. In view of the same, the representation of the petitioner for

consideration of his candidature for appointment against the Stipendiary

Cadet Trainee (SCT) Sub Inspector of Police (Civil) under Police

Executive (PE) in SC category which has fallen vacant due to the W.P.No.46818 of 2022

cancellation of the provisional selection of a meritorious candidate than

the petitioner cannot be considered.

9. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.

10. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition

shall also stand dismissed.

___________________________ JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI

Date: 13.09.2023 Svv