IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 8223 of 2006 Between: V. Suresh S/o Gangadhar R/o D. No. 7/80/50, II Town Police Quarters, Anantapur, Anantapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, State Police Recuritment Board, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintendent of Police, Anantapur, Anantapur District 3 The Director General of Fire Servies, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with Judgment of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, dated 06-02-2006 rendered in OA. No. 928/2003 and quash or set a side the same and consequently direct the Respondents to finalize the selections and appoint the applicant to the post of Driver Operator as per his merit pursuant to the Notification issued by 1st respondent in Notification Rc. No. 220/R&D/Rectt.2/2001 dated 07-12- 2001 with all consequential benefits and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.NAVEEN RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO :8223 of 2006 ORDER: (Per the Honourable Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the order of the tribunal in O.A.No.928 of 2003, dated 06.02.2006. The petitioner herein is the applicant before the tribunal. He filed the above O.A. seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not appointing him to the post of Driver Operator in SC backlog vacancy even though the selected candidate was not given appointment orders on the ground that he does not belong to SC community as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to direct the respondents to issue appointment orders to him forthwith. The tribunal having observed that the as the respondents have followed the existing orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.544, dated 4.12.1998 with regard to the unfilled vacancies and as the said G.O. is not being challenged by the applicant, the prayer sought for by the applicant cannot be granted, dismissed the O.A. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed by the applicant. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner-applicant as well as the learned Government Pleader and perused the material available on record. It is the case of the applicant that he belongs to SC community and he holds the valid certificate issued by the competent authority and that his name was figured next below the last selected candidate, who was however, not appointed on account of an adverse report with regard to his antecedents and therefore, he being the next below candidate is entitled to be considered for appointment against the fall out vacancy. As can be seen from the material on record, it is pertinent to note that in Ananthapur District, three posts of Driver Operators were notified viz., one for SC and 2 for STs and three candidates were provisionally selected and verification of their antecedents was done and on verification, it is found that one Sri K. Srikanth, who was selected as SC candidate, does not belong to SC community. It is the case of the applicant that since he is the next candidate, he is entitled to be considered against the fall out vacancy whereas it is the contention of the learned Government Pleader that the vacancy has been carried forward to the next recruitment as per G.O.Ms.No.544, General Administration (Ser.A) Department, dated 4.12.1998. It is an undisputed fact that the applicant herein is the next below the candidate viz., K. Srikanth. Notified vacancies are three only and therefore, the committee selected provisionally three candidates only. It means the applicant was not selected for the said post. Merely because the candidate, who was selected, was not issued any appointment orders and was denied appointment on any ground, that does not mean, the next candidate, who was in the non-selection, becomes eligible for appointment and on that ground, non-selected candidate cannot agitate as a matter of right. In this view of the matter and in view of the guidelines in the enshrined G.O., We have no hesitation to hold that the order of the tribunal does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and it needs no interference and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. However, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the eligibility of the petitioner to the post of Driver operator, liberty is granted to him to apply, if any fresh notification is issued and if he is otherwise eligible. ________________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ____________________ Justice G.Chandraiah Date:11.3.2008 Gurc/nn THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 8223 of 2006 (Order of Division Bench delivered by the Honourable Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) 11.3.2008