IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 21668 of 2002 Between: K.V. Gaddayya S/o Ramanna D.N.R.College of Education, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Education Department Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner and Director of School Education Hyderabad. 3 The Secretary and Correspondent D.N.R.College of Education Bhimavaram-2. 4 Sri V.V.Subba Raju S/o Ramakrishnam Raju D.N.R.College of Education, Bhimavaram. .....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 order or orders or direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the 2nd Respondent proceedings Rc.No.224/N2.3/96, dated 19-10-2002 rejecting the petitioner claim for absorption of his Junior Assistant-cum-Typist post in grant-in-aid sanctioned post with effect from 1-4-1994 and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequentially direct the respondent 1 to 3 to absorb the petitioner post into grant-in-aid with effect from 1-4-1994 in grant-in-aid sanction post vide G.O.Ms.No.254, Education, dated 5-7- 1995 with all arrears forthwith and to pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. M.L.ALI Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHIINI WRIT PETITION No.21668 OF 2002 ORDER : The petitioner herein is working as Junior Assistant-cum-Typist in the 3rd respondent College. Aggrieved by the action of the 3rd respondent college in not including his name in the proposals sent for absorption in grant-in-aid post, the petitioner had earlier filed W.P.No.2845 of 1998. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court by order dated 7.2.2002 granting liberty to the petitioner to make a detailed representation before the Commissioner and Director of School Education within two weeks and thereafter the 2nd respondent shall decide the controversy between the petitioner and the 4th respondent herein regarding the post of Junior Assistant within three months. Pursuant thereto, the Commissioner and Director of School Education, after considering the claims of both the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent, passed an order dated 19.10.2002 rejecting the request of the petitioner for absorption into grant-in-aid post Junior Assistant-cum-Typist on the ground that as on the date of sanction of the post i.e., 1.4.1994 he was working only as a Record Assistant and moreover he was not qualified for the post of Junior Assistant-cum-Typist. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record as well as the counter-affidavits filed by the respondents 2 and 3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner herein was initially appointed as a contingent employee on 5.8.1984 in the 3rd respondent College and thereafter on 8.8.1988 he was promoted as Attender. On 5.7.1992 he was promoted to the post of Record Assistant. Thereafter, on 5.3.1994 he was selected by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant-cum-Typist, and the action of the Departmental Promotion Committee was approved by the management committee of the 3rd respondent College by Resolution dated 1.5.1994. The grant-in-aid to the post of Junior Assistant-cum-Typist in the 3rd respondent College was sanctioned in G.O.Ms.No.254, dated 5.7.1995 read with G.O.Ms.No.148, dated 28.6.1996 with effect from 1.4.1994. Though the Departmental Promotion Committee met on 5.3.1994 and approved the name of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant-cum-Typist, admittedly the selection of Departmental Promotion Committee was approved by the Management Committee only on 1.5.1994. Hence, the petitioner’s promotion can be said to have been enforced only from 1.5.1994. Thus, it is clear that as on 1.4.1994 i.e., the date of admission of the post into grant-in-aid the petitioner was working only as a Record Assistant. On the other hand, the 4th respondent herein was working as Senior Assistant as on 1.4.1994. Hence, the action of the 2nd respondent in rejecting the request of the petitioner for absorption in grant-in-aid post cannot be held to be erroneous on that ground. So far as the qualifications are concerned, the qualifications prescribed under the A.P. Ministerial Service Rules, 1966 for the post of Junior Assistant-cum-Typist included a pass in the Government Technical Examination in Typewriting Telugu Higher. Admittedly the petitioner did not possess that qualification and he passed only Typewriting English Higher. However, it is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner should have been given an opportunity to acquire the qualification of Telugu Typewriting. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner ought to have been absorbed in the aided post subject to the condition that he should acquire Telugu Typewriting within the period of probation. It is contended that such a benefit was given to one candidate by name K. Kalyani, working in Sri Ch.B.R.M. Aided High School, Bhimavaram. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents contended that such exemption can be granted only where sufficient number of candidates with required qualifications are not available for appointment by direct recruitment and in the instant case since the 4th respondent, who is fully qualified is available, there is no need for granting exemption to the writ petitioner. I find force in the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents. As noticed above, the petitioner is possessing the qualifications of B.A., B.Ed., with Typewriting English Higher and he did not pass Government Technical Examination in Typewriting Telugu Higher as required under A.P. Ministerial Service Rules, 1966. It is also clear from the record that the staff pattern was prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.455, dated 28.10.1995 and the post of Junior Assistant- cum-Typist was admitted into grant-in-aid w.e.f. 1.4.1994. As on 1.4.1994 the petitioner was admittedly not possessed the required qualification. Hence, the petitioner’s contention that he ought to have been granted an opportunity to improve his qualification is untenable since as on 1.4.1994 the 4th respondent who possessed the requisite qualifications was available for absorption. It is also relevant to note that the 3rd respondent college was deleted from the grant-in-aid scheme during the pendency of this writ petition by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.4, Education (TRG.I) Department, dated 18.01.2003. It is stated by the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent college that consequent to G.O.Ms.No.4, dated 18.1.2003 grant-in-aid was withdrawn to the 3rd respondent college from the academic year 2002-2003 and as on today there are no grant-in-aid posts in the institution. Viewed from any angle, I do not find any justifiable reason to issue a writ as prayed for. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 22.04.2009 gbs