THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.24312 OF 2011 Dated:30.08.2011 Between: J.Sambaiah .. Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.24312 OF 2011 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The petitioner appeared in the examination conducted by the District Selection Commission, 2001 (DSC 2001) for appointment of Teachers and Physical Education Teachers (PETs). Statedly, he secured 47.62 marks in the written examination. He filed O.A.No.2036 of 2002 praying for a direction to the respondents to appoint him as PET pursuant to DSC, 2001 under SC (C) quota. He alleged that though there were nine vacancies of PETs., the respondents did not fill up them and if only these vacancies had been notified, he would have come up for selection. The learned Tribunal negatived his plea and dismissed the said O.A. by an order dated 27.09.2005, following the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.34306 of 1998 and batch dated 24.02.2005. After a lapse of about six years, the petitioner filed the instant writ petition challenging the order of the learned Tribunal in O.A.No.2036 of 2002 dated 27.09.2005. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated various contentions raised in the O.A. as well as in the affidavit accompanying the writ petition. The delay in approaching this Court against the order of the learned Tribunal is not explained. Further, when the subject matter is with regard to appointment pursuant to DSC, 2001 to the post of PET, the question of considering the case of the petitioner who is now 46 years old does not arise. No citizen can compel the Executive to make appointment in the existing vacancy. It is the prerogative of the appointing authority, when and how many vacancies to be filled up depending on the requirement of service. The writ petition is misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) ____________________ (K.G. SHANKAR, J) 30.08.2011 KH