IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No.1529 of 2002 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 05.07.2002 in WP No.12023 OF 2002 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Smt.D.Anjali Devi, D/o Suraiah, Hindu, R/o H.No.6-2-545, Lenin Nagar, GODAVARI KHANI P.O., Karimnagar District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The District Collecter, Karimnagar & Chairman, District. Selection Committee for A.P., Residential Schools, Karimnagar District. 2 The District Educational Officer, Karimnagar & Member, Dist., Selection Committee for A.P., Residential Schools, Karimnagar District. 3 The Principal, A.P. Residential School (Girls) & Member/ Convenor, Dist., Seclection Committee for A.P., Residential Schools, Tatipalli Village, Malyal Mandal, Karimnagar District. 4 A.P.Residential Schools Society, Rep by its Secretary, Gagan Vihar, M.J.Road, Hyderabad. 5 Smt.Ch.Bhavani, D/o Sambaiah, Hindu, R/o Gandhi Nagar, Godavari Khani P.O., Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.V.V.NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.5: The Court made the following : JUDGMENT: (Per VE,J) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as the respondents. The appellant, who was unsuccessful before the learned single Judge in questioning the selection of the fifth respondent as an Attender by the third respondent – Andhra Pradesh Residential School on the ground that the fifth respondent got less marks than her in the qualifying examination of 8th class, filed this appeal aggrieved by the dismissal of her Writ Petition No.12023 of 2002 by order dated 05.07.2002. Both the appellant as well as the fifth respondent belong to Schedule Caste Community and passed S.S.C. It is the case of the appellant that as per the orders of the Government in G.O.Ms.No.214, General Administration (Ser.A) Department, dated 08.05.2001, the recruitment in respect of back-log vacancies meant for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be based on the marks obtained by the candidates in the qualifying academic examination by waiving a written examination and interviews (oral tests). It is stated that the qualification for the post of Attender is a pass in 8th class and that the appellant obtained 68%, whereas the fifth respondent obtained 24.5% only in 8th class. It is also stated that the criteria prescribed by the selection authority was not only a pass in the qualifying examination but also knowledge of cycling. It is further stated that at the time of interview, the petitioner stated that she does not know cycling, whereas the fifth respondent stated that she knows cycling. The material placed before this Court discloses that the petitioner obtained 68% in 8th Class and 61% in S.S.C., whereas the fifth respondent obtained only 24.5% in 8th Class and was promoted to 9th Class and obtained 51.2% in S.S.C. As the fifth respondent knows cycling, she was preferred over the appellant for selection to the post of Attender as cycling is required for the said post. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the qualification of cycling is not at all prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.214 dated 08.05.2001 and therefore, the action of the third respondent in selecting the fifth respondent as an Attender is illegal and arbitrary. The qualification of cycling was made part and parcel of the criteria for selection to the post of Attender and though the fifth respondent obtained less marks in the qualifying examination of 8th class as well as in S.S.C, she admittedly knows cycling, whereas the appellant did not know cycling. Therefore, it cannot be said that the selection of the fifth respondent to the post of Attender is illegal or arbitrary. Further, as per G.O.Ms.No.214 dated 08.05.2001, the minimum qualification is 8th class for considering candidates for the post of Attender. Merely because a written examination and oral interview are waived, it cannot be said that the selecting authority is not entitled to fix the criteria for eligibility to consider the candidates from among the Scheduled Caste candidates for the post of Attender. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the selection process made by the third respondent. The Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. V.ESWARAIAH, J SANJAY KUMAR, J Date: 29.04.2009 va