IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION NO : 13102 of 2009 Between: T. Dhanraj Goud, S/o. Rajalingam, R/o. 3-5-97, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The High Court of A.P., Rep. by its Registrar (General), A.P., Hyderabad. 2 The District & Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy, Ranga Reddy District. .....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 a writ order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that selectin made to the post of Office Subordinates (Attenders) in the unit of the Hon'ble District Judge, R.R. District in pursuance of notification No. 14/7202/2008, dt. 6-10-2008 for which approval of the Hon'ble High Court was communicated by the proceedings of the 1st respondent in letter ROC NO. 301/2008-RC, dt. 23- 6-2009 is illegal, arbitrary and therefore violative of Article 14, 16, 21 and 371-D of the Constitution of INdia and in violation of presidential order and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.SURENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.M.BHASKARA LAKSHMI (SC FOR APHC) The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P.No. 13102 of 2009 ORDER: (Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) 1. This writ petition is filed challenging the selection made to the posts of Attenders in the unit of District Judge, Ranga Reddy district in pursuance of notification dated 6.10.2008. 2. According to the petitioner, a notification dated 6.10.2008 was issued by the District Judge, Ranga Reddy district inviting applications for appointment to 87 posts of office subordinates in A.P. Last Grade Services by direct recruitment and of them 27 posts were earmarked for open competition, and 5 posts were earmarked for BC-B and remaining posts were earmarked for other B.C. candidates including women. The petitioner belongs to BC-B and his grievance is that although he has fared well in the interview for the post of attender, but he was not selected, but whereas the candidates under BC-B who are non-locals were selected which was not in accordance with Presidential Order. 3. 2nd respondent-District Judge, Ranga Reddy district has filed a counter-affidavit stating that the petitioner who belongs to BC-B community appeared for the oral interview on 20.1.2009 and he secured 45 marks. It is stated that candidates were selected for 85 posts at the ratio of 1:3 and from among the BC-B candidates, the first candidate secured highest marks of 85.25, while the last candidate secured 78.25 and as the petitioner has secured 45 marks, he was not selected. It is further stated in the counter- affidavit that among the candidates belonging to BC-A group, the first five candidates secured highest marks and therefore they were selected, though they were non-local candidates. 4. In view of the averments made in the counter-affidavit, we do not find any merit in this writ petition. Nonetheless, as the petitioner secured 45 marks only, he is not eligible to seek appointment. The writ petition is not maintainable and it is liable to be dismissed. 5. The writ petition is dismissed. However, no order as to costs. _____________________________ JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED ________________________________ JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR Dt. 30.7.2009 KR ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}