IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No : 187 of 2009 Between: V.V.Naga Raju, S/o. Suri Babu, R/o. H.No.D-25, Rudrampur Village, Kothagudem Mandal, Khammam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The APGENCO rep by its Managing Director, Vidyut soudha, Hyderabad. 2 The Chief Engineer, O&m, KTPS-V Stage, Paloncha, Khammam District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents in rejecting the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Junior Plant Attendant (JPA) in spite of interviewing the petitioner in pursuance of Call Letter No.CEE/O&M/KTPS/V-Stage/PO/Adm/E.33/D.No.1782/99, dated 29- 10-1999 without even issuing any order in writing and further action of the respondents in proceeding to fill up the existing posts of JPA in KTPS-V Stage and Old Plant as highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art.14 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.EATHAKOTA VENKATA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.CHIDAMBARAM(SC FOR AP GENCO) The Court made the following O R D E R : This Writ Petition has been instituted seeking directions to the respondents to consider the case of the writ petitioner for the post of Junior Plant Attendant in Kothagudem Thermal Power Station. The case of the writ petitioner is that he has passed ITI in Fitter Trade, securing 475 out of 700 marks. When the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board has issued a notification for recruitment to the posts of Junior Plant Attendants in Kothagudem Thermal Power Station, on 2nd February 1999, the writ petitioner has applied for the vacancies notified for Fitter Trade, as he is eligible to be considered for the same. He asserts that he has been directed to attend an oral interview on 9th November 1999, but however, his case has not been considered for selection at all. He submits that he is a member belonging to Scheduled Castes and, therefore, the action of the respondents in not considering his candidature is wrong. The respondents have filed a detailed counter in the matter. While they do not dispute or deny the fact that the writ petitioner appears to have obtained the ITI Certificate in Fitter Trade and also the fact that the writ petitioner is a member belonging to Scheduled Castes, but what has been disputed by them was the assertion of the writ petitioner that he was issued call letter bearing No. 1782 of 1999, dated 29th October 1999, directing him to appear for the interview on 9th November 1999. It is asserted that the call letter, which has been issued to the writ petitioner, was bearing No. 4746, whereas the call letter bearing No. 1782 was issued to one Sri G. Mohana Rao, who belongs to open category. In terms of the call letter issued to the writ petitioner, he did not attend the interview and consequently, he could not be selected. Therefore, the counter-affidavit asserts that the fault in not selecting the writ petitioner is not due to the action of the respondents, but because of the failure of the writ petitioner to respond to the call letter issued to him inviting him to attend the interview. It will be relevant to notice that the selection process comprises of two elements. The first element is allocation of 90% of marks for the marks secured at the ITI Certificate Examination. The balance 10% of marks are set apart for viva-voce. Therefore, both the components are integral to the selection process. If the writ petitioner has not attended the viva-voce test, as per the schedule fixed in the call letter issued to him, the respondents cannot be faulted. It is the mistake of the writ petitioner in not having properly noticed the schedule of the viva-voce test as notified to him. Though the counter-affidavit tries to raise a controversy relating to the number of the call letter issued to the writ petitioner and the one which he has produced, but however, in view of the decision to which I have arrived, I do not propose to pronounce any opinion on that. There appears to be some factual mix up on the part of the writ petitioner, but however, in view of the statement made by the respondents that the writ petitioner has not attended the interview as per the schedule fixed in the call letter No. 4746 issued to him, I cannot find fault with the action of the respondents in not selecting the writ petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed only on that ground. However, it will be important to bear in mind that the writ petitioner is a member belonging to Scheduled Castes and in terms of the policy of the reservations in favour of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes candidates, in the matter of direct recruitment, if any vacancy, which is liable to be filled in by a member belonging to Scheduled Castes, is still available, the case of the writ petitioner deserves a consideration. Therefore, at my request, Sri K. Chidambaram, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, obtained instructions in the matter and informs that there are ten Backlog vacancies to be filled in by the members belonging to Scheduled Castes. I, therefore, consider it appropriate to direct the respondents to take necessary steps for filling up the Backlog vacancies in favour of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates by initiating the process of recruitment in that regard, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is certainly open to the respondents to make an assessment with regard to the manpower requirement now as well as in the nearest future. In case the respondents arrive at a conclusion that there is no immediate manpower requirement, they may, however, take steps for filling up the Backlog vacancies as and when such manpower is required, by giving priority for filling up the Backlog vacancies. It will only be appropriate that the respondents shall consider the case of the writ petitioner purely on its merits, without any regard to the contents of the averments made in this Writ Petition or the counter affidavit filed therein. The Writ Petition stands disposed of in terms of this order. No costs. ---------------------------------- (NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J) 16th July 2009 ksld ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{LS}