IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P. Nos. 22110 and 22377 of 2008 WRIT PETITION NO : 22110 of 2008 Between: 1 M. Shankar S/o. Agaiah R/o. 12-12-174 (Flat No.4), Sri Devi Apartment, Sitaphalmandi, Secunderabad. 2 P. Murali S/o. P. Bala Swami R/o. 16-11-404/25, Flat No.103, Ananta Sai Nivas, SBI. Officers' Colony, Moosarambhagh, Hyderabad. 3 M. Ramana Kumar S/o. Kishan Rao R/o. CI Residence, PS Complex, Manchiryal, Adilabad Dist. 4 K.M. Kiran Kumar S/o. K.S. Tirumala Chari R/o. SI Quarter - 9, Shanti Nagar, Police Line, AC Guards, Hyderabad. 5 P. Sri Rama Murthy S/o. Tata Rao Quarter No.8, Begumpet Police Line, Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Director General of Police Lakdi-ka-pool, Hyderabad. 2 The Inspector General of Police O/o. The Director General of Police, Lakdi-ka-pool, Hyderabad. 3 The Additional Director General of Police Training & Recruitment O/o. The Director General of Police, Lakdi-ka-pool, 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 mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not sending the names of the petitioners for the UN SAT Test in pursuance of the Govt. of India proceedings No.21023/15/2008-PMA, dated 03-09-2008 in accordance with the merit as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Art.14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and contrary to the proceedings of the Govt. of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities to send the names of the petitioners for the UN SAT Test at Delhi pursuant to the Govt. of India proceedings No.21023/15/2008- PMA, dated 03-09-2008 in accordance with the merit. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.RAJENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME WRIT PETITION NO : 22377 of 2008 Between: 1 Paleru Satyanarayana S/o. Venkaiah Hyderabad. 2 Jonnagadla Babu Prasad S/o. J.Chennaiah Kurnool Traffic P.S.Kurnool. 3 Nyathawada Shyam Prasad S/o. Ram Chandar Rao Vigilance & Enforcement, Hyderabad rural. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Director General of Police, Lakdi-ka-pool, Hyderabad. 2 The Inspector General of Police, O/o. The Directror General of Police, Lakdi-ka-pool Hyderabad. 3 The Additional Director General of Police, Training & Recruitment, O/o. The Director General of Police, Lakdi-ka-pool, 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent authorities in not sending the names of the petitioenrs for the UN SAT Test in pursuance of the Government of India proceedings No. 21023/15/2008-PMA, dated 03.09.2008 in accordance with the merit as arbitrary, illegal, and violative of Article 14,21 and 300- A of the Constitution of India and contrary to the proceedings of the government of India and consequently direct the respondent authorities to sent the names of the petitioners for the UN SAT Test at Delhi pursuant to the Government of India proceedings No. 21023/15/2008-PMA, dated 03.09.2008 in accordance with the merit and pass such other order or orders as this Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.RAJENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. Nos. 22110 and 22377 of 2008 COMMON ORDER: These writ petitions are ﬁled seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not sending the petitioners’ names for UN SAT Test in pursuance of the Government of India Proceedings No. 21023/15/2008-PMA dated 3.9.2008 as per the merit, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and contrary to the proceedings of the Government of India and consequently to direct the respondents to sponsor the names of the petitioners for UNSAT Test at Delhi. Since the issue in both the writ petitions is one and the same, they are disposed of by this common order. It appears, petitioners in both the writ petitions are working as Sub-Inspectors and Inspectors of Police in various parts of the State of Andhra Pradesh. It is their case that the Union of India vide proceedings dated 3.9.2008, asked all the States and Union Territories to nominate Police Oﬃcers for deployment in the United Nations Peace Keeping Missions. The eligibility criteria for selection of the candidates has been prescribed at para 5 of the said proceedings. Pursuant to the same, the respondent authorities have called for applications from eligible and intending candidates. After screening the applications, the respondents have selected 140 candidates as eligible for the test. Many candidates were disallowed in the screening of the applications on the basis of eligibility ﬁxed by the Union of India in their proceedings dated 3.9.2008. Further, many candidates, who have earlier been on United Nations Peace Keeping Missions, were refused for the test on the ground that they have not completed the cooling oﬀ period. The petitioners herein, along with 140 candidates, were among the eligible candidates for the written examination, interview and ﬁring test. The respondents have conducted the required tests for about 140 candidates on 25.9.2008. According to the petitioners, the selection process of eligible candidates was on the basis of (1) Reading Comprehension, (2) Listening Comprehension, (3) Report Writing, (4) Interview and (5) Firing Test. According to the petitioners, out of 140 candidates, after elimination process, 39 candidates were selected for ﬁring test, which was conducted on 26.9.2008. The respondents have nominated 20 candidates for UN SAT Test to be held at Delhi. It is the case of the petitioners that all of them are in the ﬁrst 20 ranks of the merit list prepared by the authorities for the above test and that by dint of their hard work, earlier they were selected for the U.N. Peace Keeping Mission. All of them have completed the cooling oﬀ period of three years. However, they were informed that all the candidates who have been selected for U.N. Peace Keeping Mission earlier shall not be selected for UN SAT Test at Delhi. Aggrieved thereby, they ﬁled the present writ petition. Now a detailed counter aﬃdavit has been ﬁled by the respondents denying the allegations made by the petitioners. Of course, the merit obtained by the petitioners was not disputed. But, it is stated, that those who have been sent for U.N. Peace Keeping Mission earlier were eliminated for the purpose of giving a chance to the novice who are selected. Further, the services of the petitioners are required elsewhere in the State, therefore, they were not selected for being sent to UN SAT Test at Delhi. Learned Assistant Solicitor General, appearing for the Union of India, however stated that there is no bar to send the personnel for U.N. Peace Keeping Mission for the second time, if they are found to be meritorious. The only bar is that one should have completed three years’ cooling oﬀ period having returned from the U.N. Peace Keeping Mission. Insofar as the petitioners are concerned, they have completed three years’ cooling oﬀ period, but they were denied to be sent for UN SAT Test at Delhi only on the ground that their services are required elsewhere and chance is being given to the novice who are selected for the ﬁrst time among the meritorious candidates. At this stage, learned Government Pleader for Home submitted that the personnel, who are selected, are already undergoing training at Delhi and the question of conducting training again or sending the petitioners for the test at this stage does not arise. From these facts, ﬁrstly it is clear that the respondents could not have denied the selection of the petitioners for the purpose of UN SAT Test at Delhi on the ground that they have been sent earlier for U.N. Peace Keeping Mission, since there is no such bar except completion of cooling oﬀ period of three years. Secondly, this decision is taken by the respondents without intimating before the candidates appeared for the test. Thirdly, they have also stated that the services of the petitioners are required elsewhere. This amounts to framing the Rules after the game is over. This sort of decision taken by the respondents is depricable and it can deﬁnitely be said that the respondents have not acted fairly. Whatever decision they had to take, they might have taken before the applications are invited for selection. However, learned counsel for the petitioners states that those who are selected in 2007 Batch and who could not be sent for UN SAT Test were considered in 2008 Batch along with those who are selected for the year 2008. Therefore, there is no bar for considering the case of the petitioners for selection to the UN SAT Test in 2009 Batch for sending them to the U.N. Peace Keeping Mission. This fact is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. Under these circumstances, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioners on the basis of the merit obtained this year for sending them to UN SAT Test, to be conducted at Delhi for the purpose of sending them for U.N. Peace Keeping Mission in 2009. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. C.V. RAMULU, J. Date: 11-11-2008. MVB.