THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BILAL NAZKI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO.2390 OF 2007 DATED 05-03-2007 Between: Mohd. Abdul Rahim. …Petitioner And District and Sessions Judge, Mahaboobnagar District and another. …Respondents The Hon’ble Sri Justice Bilal Nazki and The Hon’ble Sri Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao Writ Petition No.2390 of 2007 O R D E R (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Bilal Nazki): Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Counsel for the respondents. The grievance of the petitioner is that although he was interviewed on 04-03-2005 for the post of attender/process server, no communication was sent to him as to whether he was selected or not. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the petitioner was considered under the category of orthopedically handicapped and he secured only 30 marks and another candidate, who was also an orthopedically handicapped, secured 55 marks, which was the minimum eligibility. As there was only one post reserved for orthopedically handicapped persons, the candidate, who secured 55 marks, was selected for the said post. In this view of the matter, no further directions can be given to the respondents in the present Writ Petition. Another grievance of the writ petitioner in this Writ Petition is that after the interview was conducted on 04-03-2005, he was not informed about the results. The learned Counsel for the respondents submits that about 7000 candidates have appeared for the interview and it is practically impossible to inform each candidate. The apprehension of the petitioner is that he was registered with the second respondent- employment exchange and had been sponsored by the second respondent-employment exchange and in case of no information from the first respondent- employer as to whether the candidate who was sponsored earlier had been selected or not, the second respondent would not sponsor him further. In this view of the matter, we direct the first respondent that in case of selection/non-selection of the candidates sponsored by the second respondent- employment exchange, the first respondent should invariably inform the second respondent-employment exchange as to which of the candidates sponsored by them was called and which of them were rejected so that they do not score off the names of those candidates, who are not selected, and are also in a position to score off the names of the persons, who are selected and appointed. We direct the second respondent-employment exchange to consider the petitioner’s case again for sponsorship whenever the posts, for which he is qualified, are available. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. ____________________________ (Bilal Nazki, J) Dated 5th March, 2007 ______________________​______ (Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J) lur