THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No. 6596 of 1997 DATED: 06.02.2007 Between: G.N.V.L. Muralikrishna Kumari .. Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others. .. Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No. 6596 of 1997 ORDER: The action of the respondents in not giving orders of appointment to the petitioner as Secondary Grade Teacher/Special Teacher, in respect of the selections held in 1989, is questioned in this Writ Petition as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner appeared for the selections held in 1989. She appeared for the written test on 26.02.1989 and the interviews held between 02.03.1989 and 04.03.1989. The petitioner would believe that she had done extremely well in the interview and would contend that, though her name was included in the select panel, no appointment orders were given to her. The petitioner would submit that, in W.P.No.17104 of 1993 and batch, interim orders were passed on 08.09.1994 directing the respondents to prepare a select list of all those who had secured 40% marks both in written and oral tests strictly in accordance with Rule 13 of G.O.Ms.No. 716, dated 13.11.1981, and appoint all those who ﬁnd a place in such select list as teachers subject to the terms and conditions speciﬁed in the interim orders passed on 12.11.1993 in WPMP Nos.21607, 21608, 21609 etc. Petitioner would claim that, having come to know of these orders, she had approached this Court with a view to ensure that the relief was not conﬁned merely to those who approached this Court earlier and that she should also be extended the same benefit. In the counter aﬃdavit ﬁled on behalf of the fourth respondent, it is stated that the Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.231, dated 31.03.1989, prescribing a revised procedure for recruitment in the 24 categories of posts speciﬁed therein for W.G. Zilla Parishad, but the procedure prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.716, dated 13.11.1981, which was in force prior to the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.231 dated 31.03.1989, was followed. It is stated that the petitioner appeared for interview and, since she belongs to O.C. category and secured 32 marks in the written test, she was called for interview. It is also stated that the candidate, who secures 40 marks in both written and oral test was deemed to have qualiﬁed. Since, however, the petitioner secured 32 marks in the written test and 7 marks in oral, the total marks secured by her was 39 marks and was less than the cut oﬀ marks of 40, she did not qualify for inclusion in the select list. It is stated that a panel of 1207 candidates was prepared and they were given posting orders, and that there were no candidates left in the 1989 panel who were required to be considered for appointment as teachers. In view of the fact that the petitioner has failed to secure the minimum cut oﬀ marks prescribed for selection, no relief can be granted in her favour. The Writ Petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J) 06.02.2007 vv