HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD DATE:11.03.2010 WRIT PETITION No. 1837 of 2006 Between: N. Simhachalam S/o Appanna ..... PETITIONER AND A.P. Public Service Commission .....RESPONDENT ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This Writ Petition is filed assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 15.5.2002 passed by the Andhra pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No. 1397 of 1995. O.A.No. 1397 of 1995 was field alleging the action of the respondents in not selecting the applicant for the post of Deputy Tahsildar in Zone-I and selecting him for the post of Revenue Inspector in Zone-V even though he got more marks than other candidates. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is presently working as a Panchayat Secretary at Gudivada Village, Bhogapuram Mandal, Vijayanagaram District. It is stated that earlier he was appointed as a Village Development Officer, Jonnada Group of Villages, Vijayanagaram District. In the year 1989 the petitioner appeared Group III examination conducted by the first respondent and he was selected as Village Development Officer and allotted to Vijayanagaram District, which is coming under Zone-I and the District Collector appointed him as Village Development Officer on 27.12.1989 and he joined the post of Village Development Officer on 6.1.1990. While so, in the year 1990 the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission issued a notification for Group II Selection and the petitioner applied and given preference for the post of Assistant Commercial Tax Officer, Deputy Tasildar, Municipal Commissioner, Sub-Registrar, Junior Employment Officer, and he appeared for written examination at Vizag center in the year 1991 and was called for interview held in the month of November 1992. After that the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission announced results for the Group II examination on 16.3.1995. It is stated that even though he secured 406.5 marks he was surprised to find that he was selected to the post of Revenue Inspector in Zone V and further three candidates belongs to SC community were given the post of Deputy Tasildar in Zone I. Being aggrieved by the same, he filed O.A.No. 1397 of 1995 and the Tribunal by an order dated 15.5.2002 dismissed the O.A. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn our attention to paragraph 5 of the Presidential Order (Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment Order), which reads as under : “Para 5. Local cadres and transfer of persons: (1) Each part of the State for which a local cadre has been organized in respect of any category of posts, shall be a separate unit for purposes of recruitment, appointment, discharge, seniority, promotion and transfer, and such other matters as may be specified by the State Government, in respect of that category of posts. (2) Nothing in this Order shall prevent the State Government from making provision for – (a) the transfer of a person from any local cadre to any Office or Establishment to which this Order does not apply, or vice-versa; (b) the transfer of a person from a local cadre comprising posts in any Office or Establishment exercising territorial jurisdiction over a part of the State to any other local cadre comprising posts in such part, or vice-versa; (c) the transfer of a person from one local cadre to another local cadre where no qualified or suitable person is available in the latter cadre on where such transfer is otherwise considered necessary in the public interest; and (d) the transfer of a person from one local cadre to another local cadre on a reciprocal basis, subject to the condition that the person so transferred shall be assigned seniority in the latter cadre with reference to the date of his transfer to that cadre.” Petitioner counsel further has drawn our attention to II Schedule of Civil Services in Andhra Pradesh relating to matters in respect of Recruitment and Regulation. 14-A of the Regulation reads as under: “Regulation 14-A:- It shall be necessary for the Commission in the matter of recruitment to the posts and service to strictly adhere to wherever applicable the provisions contained:- (i) in the General Rule 22 and 22-A; (ii) the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organization of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, 1975; (iii) the instructions issued by the Government in regard to selection of candidates both by direct recruitment and recruitment by transfer for the various services; and (iv) such other rules and orders issued by the Government from time to time governing such recruitment.” The main grievance of the petitioner is that the Tribunal ought not to have held that the petitioner is a non-local candidate, as the petitioner proved that he is the native of Thotada Village and passed his matriculation examination conducted by the Andhra University in the year 1973. His further grievance is he filed a representation before the first respondent on 4.6.2005 with a request to consider his case for appointment as the Deputy Tasildar in Zone-I and that representation was not considered in view of the orders passed by the Tribunal dated 15.5.2002. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel has placed before us the endorsements made by three Officers, whereas the petitioner has produced all the original certificates except the residential certificate issued by the competent authority and he pursued his matriculation and got certificate from the Andhra University and again he appeared intermediate privately and that by itself does not require to be treated as local candidate. As educational qualifications are prescribed for appointment to the posts included in Group-II (A) services the schools in which the petitioner had studied 4 yeas prior to passing of SCC is the criterion to decide as to which zone he has to be treated as local candidate. As seen from the facts, the applicant has passed Intermediate by appearing as a private candidate and he has not prosecuted his studies in any school for determining to which zone he belongs to as local candidate based on his school certificates and the residence certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer would be the criterion for deciding his local candidature. The petitioner has not filed any residence certificate issued by the Mandal Revenue Officer and on the application also, there is an endorsement by the APPSC authorities that the applicant has not filed residence certificate and therefore, he was admitted as a non-local candidate. Hence, the Tribunal rightly dismissed the O.A. making the following observation: “Therefore, it cannot be said that the action of APPSC in not selecting the applicant to the post of Deputy Tahsildar, ACTO, etc., as a non- local candidate is arbitrary and illegal. Even if the applicant has not given option to the post of Revenue Inspector and if he was selected by APPSC to the post of Revenue Inspector in Zone-V it is open to him to reject the offer of appointment and the applicant cannot have any grievance if an offer of appointment is made to the applicant to a post to which he has not given his preference and for which post he has no interest. Thus, there are no merits in the OA and it is accordingly dismissed.” In view of the above finding given by the Tribunal, this Writ Petition is misconceived and the order passed by the Tribunal does not suffer from any legal infirmity. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED,J _______________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD ,J 11.03.2010 KA Note: LR Copy to be marked ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1. 2 CD copies.