[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Telangana High Court

Sanjay vs The State Of Telangana on 31 March, 2026

      IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF
           TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH
           WRIT PETITIONNo.13135 of 2024

                    DATE: 31.03.2026
Between:
Sanjay
                                            ...Petitioner
                          AND
1. State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary,
School Education, and two others
                                       ...Respondents

ORDER:

The present Writ Petition is filed questioning Memo

No.708/TRT/Rectt.I/4/2017 dated 06.09.2021 issued

by Respondent No.2, whereby the candidature of the

petitioner for further selection to the post of Secondary

Grade Teacher (SGT) in Hindi Medium was rejected on

the ground that the petitioner had not secured 40%

marks to consider under OC Category which is illegal,

arbitrary and in violation of the orders passed by this

Court in WP No.45743 of 2019 dated 12.07.2021 and

SK, J

sought to set aside the impugned Memo and

consequently direct the respondents to appoint him as

Secondary Grade Teacher.

2. Heard Sri G. Ravinder, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri P.S.Raja Shekar, learned Standing

Counsel appearing for Respondent No.2.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the Respondent No.2 issued Notification No.53/2017

dated 21.10.2017 for recruitment of Teachers. Under the

said notification, ten (10) vacancies for the post of SGT

(Hindi) in Adilabad District were notified, out of which

three (3) were earmarked for OC (G) Local category. In

response thereto, the petitioner applied for the said post

and appeared for the examination conducted on

02.03.2018. The petitioner secured 39.500 marks and

as per the revised merit list, the petitioner was placed at

Rank No.10 in Adilabad District. The petitioner also

attended certificate verification on 24.08.2018.

SK, J

However, the final selection list was published without

including the petitioner's hall ticket number and only

the two candidates were shown as selected under the

said category. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner

submitted representation on 05.03.2019 to Respondent

No.2. The said representations were rejected on the

ground that the petitioner did not secure the minimum

qualifying marks of 40% required for selection under the

OC (G) category. Challenging the same, the present writ

petition is filed and the impugned order is liable to be

set aside as the petitioner is eligible for appointment in

the unfilled vacancy as the petitioner qualified in the

written examination and was subjected to certificate

verification.

4. The learned Standing Counsel, basing on the

counter affidavit filed by Respondent No.2, submits that

the petitioner had earlier filed W.P. No.4753 of 2019 on

similar grounds. The said writ petition was disposed of

SK, J

on 12.07.2021 with a direction to the respondents to

consider the representation dated 05.03.2019 submitted

by the petitioner, duly taking into account Paragraphs

'8' and '12' of the Notification dated 21.10.2017 and to

pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. In

compliance with the said directions, Respondent No.2

issued Memo dated 06.09.2021 informing to the

petitioner that he belongs to BC-D category and had

secured 39 marks in the written examination. As per the

Notification, the petitioner would be eligible for

consideration against vacancies earmarked for BC-D

category, for which the minimum qualifying marks are

35%. However, no vacancies were notified for BC-D

category in Adilabad District. In the absence of BC-D

vacancies, the petitioner could only be considered

against OC category vacancies, for which the minimum

qualifying marks prescribed are 40%. Since the

petitioner did not secure the required 40% marks, he

SK, J

was ineligible for selection under the OC (General)

category. The unfilled vacancies from the earlier

notification have been carried forward and notified

afresh under Notification No.24/RC.I/TRT/DSC/2024

dated 29.02.2024 issued by the School Education

Department, in accordance with the applicable rules and

the petitioner does not meet the minimum eligibility

criteria for selection against OC category vacancies and

no relief can be granted and there are no merits and

requested to dismiss the writ petition.

5. After hearing both sides and on perusing the

record, this Court is of the considered view that the

instant writ petition is filed questioning the action of the

respondents in not selecting the petitioner for the post of

Secondary Grade Teacher (Hindi) in O.C (General) Local

Category on the ground that the petitioner has not

secured 40 Marks in the written examination

SK, J

conducted by the respondents in pursuance to the

Notification NO.53/2017, dated 21.10.2017.

6. The contention of the petitioner is that he has

qualified in the written examination as per the

Notification by securing 39.500 Marks and minimum

qualifying marks selction for B.Cs are 35% and in view

of the same the petitioner is eligible for selection to the

post of SGT meant for O.C (General) Category.

7. The Clause-1 of Para-VII of the impugned

Notification No.53 of 2017, dated 21.10.2017, reads as

under:

"1. Those candidates who qualify in the Examination (Objective Type) in order of merit by giving 80% weightage for written test and 20% weightage marks in TET Paper-I put together will be called for verification of certificates, community an category wise, for the vacancies available s required. The minimum qualifying marks for selection are OCs 40%, BCs 35%, SCs, STs and PHs 30%. The minimum qualifying marks are relaxable in the case of SC/ST/BC/PH at the discretion of the Commission."

SK, J

8. The petitioner now seeking appointment to the

post of SGT under the OC (General) category on the

ground that he secured 39.500 marks, having qualified

under the B.C category, for which the minimum

qualifying marks for selection is 35%.

9. The respondents have rightly contended that,

based on the marks secured, the petitioner is eligible for

consideration only under the B.C. category and not

under the Open Category and similar issue was

considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of

India vs. G. Kiran and Others1. The relevant portions

of the said judgment are extracted hereunder:

"36. In the facts of the present case, the General category cut-off for the Preliminary Examination was fixed at 267. Respondent No. 1 secured 247.18 marks. Had the Respondent No. 1 been put against the general standard, his candidature would have been terminated at the first stage i.e., the Preliminary Examination. His candidature succeeded in the first stage of the examination because of the relaxed standards allowed in the Preliminary Examination for SC candidates i.e. 233 marks. After availing the benefit of this

2026 SCC Online SC 22

SK, J

relaxation for admission to the Main Examination, Respondent No. 1 cannot subsequently claim to have been selected on "General Standard" merely due to his performance in the subsequent stages surpassed the general standard. Therefore, if a candidate who has resorted a relaxation at any stage of examination, would not fall within the purview of the proviso to Rule 14(ii) of the Exam Rules, 2013 and in that situation, for the purpose of the applicable Policy for cadre allocation, he would not fall within the list of candidates selected on 'General Standard' claiming General Insider vacancy of home state cadre as insider candidate..

37. In light of the above exposition of law, we are of the opinion that in the present fact situation, the 'General Insider' vacancy in Karnataka was rightfully allocated to Respondent No. 3, who qualified the Preliminary Examination, Main Examination, and Interview on general standard. It is needless to say, Respondent No. 1, having qualified the Preliminary Examination availing 'relaxed standard', becoming eligible for the Main Examination must be considered against the reserved vacancies only and cannot be considered on general/unreserved vacancies for the purpose of cadre allocation".

(Emphasis added)

10. The above said finding of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court squarely apply to the facts of the present case.

The petitioner, having qualified by securing 39.500

marks, by taking concession under BC-Category, now

SK, J

he cannot claim in the vacancy meant for OC General

Category, as there is no vacancy under the BC category.

In view of the same, the petitioner is not entitled for

selection under OC General Category post. The

respondents have rightly rejected the application of the

petitioner through impugned order dated 06.09.2021 for

selection to the post of SGT (Hindi).

11. In view of the above finding, this writ petition is

dismissed. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in

this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. There shall be no

orders as to costs.

_____________________ JUSTICE K.SARATH Date:31.03.2026.

trr