IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR BILAL NAZKI THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 27029 of 2003 Between: K.Suresh Babu, S/o.K.Subbarayudu, R/o.C/o.B.Pullaiah (Retd.MRO), H.No.5/15/22-A, Rajeev Nagar, SAP Camp Post Office, Kurnool-518 003. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Hon'ble District Judge, Kurnool District. 2 High Court of A.P., rep. by its Registrar (Administration), Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the appointment of the petitioner in the post of Steno-Typist or judicial ministerial services though the petitioner continuously worked as Steno-Typist for 3 years in spite of the directions of this Hon'ble High Court made in W.p.No.13810 of 1999 dt. 23-8-1999 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the settled law and also violation of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as Steno-Typist or any judicial ministerial service in existing vacancies in Kurnool District. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RAVINDRA BABU Counsel for the Respondent Nos 1 & 2.: SMT.M.BHASKARA LAKSHMI (SC FOR APHC) The Court made the following : O R D E R (Per Hon’ble Mr.Bilal Nazki, the Acting Chief Justice) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 . Petitioner was appointed as Stenographer on ad hoc basis for different spells of 89 days. Then he filed a writ petition and the court directed that in case of regular selection, he should be given preference. Regular selection was made and he was not selected. Therefore, he filed this writ petition. 3 . In the counter it has been stated that there was no question of giving any preferential treatment to the writ petitioner, as he failed in the skill test. 4. Since the petitioner had failed in the skill test, therefore, in our view no preference could be given to him and as such we do not find any merit in the writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ---------------------------- BILAL NAZKI, HACJ ---------------------------- G.CHANDRAIAH,J AVS 7.6.05 ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Hon'ble District Judge, Kurnool District. 2 High Court of A.P., rep. by its Registrar (Administration), Hyderabad. 3) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ }