HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P. NO. 33516 of 1997 DATED: 04-04-2007 Between:- Sreekantha Sreedevi w/o Ramakrishna Rao, aged about 34 years, R/o Gudulur Mandal, Prakasam, Ongole. … PETITIONER And The Regional Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C. Prakasam region, Ongole District and two others. … RESPONDENTS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN W.P. NO. 33516 of 1997 O R D E R Seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare failure of respondents 1 and 2 in intimating the petitioner the results of the interview held on 09- 06-1997 to the post of Conductor Grade-II, as arbitrary and illegal, the present writ petition is filed. The petitioner’s contention, in short, is that while she had applied for appointment to the post of Conductor, pursuant to the advertisement issued by the A.P.S.R.T.C., on 25.04.1997, was called upon to appear for the interview on 09-06-1997 and was assured that the results would be intimated to her, no such intimation was given to her by the respondents. The petitioner would submit that, under the advertisement, the qualification prescribed for appointment to the post of Conductors was S.S.C. with a minimum height of 153 cms. and that the age limit for O.C. candidates was 34 years. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents it is stated that the petitioner was called for interview on 09-06-1997 along with other candidates and the Selection Committee, on perusing the certificates relating to the education and age, found that the petitioner’s height was only 150.25 cms. as against the prescribed height of 153 cms and finding that the petitioner was below the minimum prescribed height she was not selected for appointment as a Conductor. It is further stated that the Selection Committee had prepared a panel of eligible candidates strictly in accordance with merit to fill up 160 vacancies. Respondents would deny the petitioner’s contention that she was not informed about the results and submit that, at the time of interview itself, she was informed that since her height was only 150.25 cms., as against the prescribed height of 153 cms., she could not be selected for appointment. Respondents would further submit that the selection list was also exhibited in the notice board of the Regional Manager’s office, Ongole on 12.06.1997 for information of the candidates who were personally told about the results and that the petitioner was informed in the interview itself about her not fulfilling the requirement of possessing the minimum height prescribed as the reason for her non-selection. It is necessary to note that prescription of the minimum height of 153 cms. is not under challenge in this writ petition. In fact in the legal notice sent on behalf of the petitioner, filed as an annexure to the writ petition, it is stated that the petitioner’s height was 152.25 cms., which is also below the minimum prescribed height of 153 cms. Even if the petitioner’s contention, that the result of the interview was not intimated to her, is to be accepted no rule which requires the result of the interview to be intimated to the petitioner has been brought to the notice of this Court. Failure to intimate the results of non-selection cannot be said to be in violation of principles of Natural Justice or to contravene Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. There are no merits in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J Dated: 04-04-2007 vp