IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.12259 of 2011 Date:27.06.2011 Between: Nemala Srimannarayana and 2 others. .....Petitioners AND The A.P.S.R.T.C., rep. By its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, Hyderabad and another ....Respondents The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.12259 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the action of the respondents in not selecting the petitioners as ‘Shramiks’ in the 1st respondent Corporation, pursuant to the notification issued on 1.11.2010 by the 1st respondent, even though they got higher marks than the selected candidates in the 2nd respondent Region as arbitrary, illegal and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and in violation of Circular No.PD-55/2010 dated 21.10.2010 of the 1st respondent and to issue a consequential direction to the respondents to re-consider the case of the petitioners and appoint them as ‘Shramiks’ in the 1st respondent Corporation. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the present writ petition may be stated as follows: The 1st petitioner has completed his 10th class in the year 1991 and thereafter he passed intermediate in the year 1994, that thereafter he joined in ITI in the trade of Diesel Mechanic and passed the same in the year 1996, that thereafter he joined Apprentice Training under the Apprenticeship Act, 1961 at A.P.S.R.T.C Gannavaram and completed the same in the year 2003, that he got 503 marks out of 700 marks in the above training and he belongs to OC community. The 2nd petitioner hails from S.C Community and he passed ITI in the year 1995 in the trade of Diesel Mechanic by getting 548 marks out of 700 marks in the examination, that thereafter he joined Apprentice Training under the Apprenticeship Act, 1961 at A.P.S.R.T.C, Gannavaram and competed the same in the year 2003. The 3rd petitioner belongs to B.C-B community and he passed ITI in Diesel Mechanic trade in the year 2005 and got 557 marks out of 700 marks and later he joined Apprentice Training under the Apprenticeship Act, 1961 at A.P.S.R.T.C, Gannavaram and completed the same in the year 2008. Pursuant to the permission granted by the Government of A.P., to the 1st respondent to conduct direct recruitment to various categories during the year 2010-11, 1st respondent issued a Circular No.PD- 55/2010, dated 21.10.2010 giving detailed instructions for the recruitment of candidates to the category of ‘Shramiks’. As per the circular, the candidate should possess a minimum qualification of ITI with diesel Mechanic Trade for the posts in regions and workshops and the candidate must not be above 30 years of age as on 1st July of the year in which the recruitment is made for regions and workshops. It was further mentioned in the circular that the age relaxation of 5 years for BC/SC/ST candidates were given. Pursuant to the above circular, the 1st respondent issued paper notification on 1.11.2010 calling applications for various posts including ‘Shramiks’ in the 2nd respondent jurisdiction and the petitioners applied to the 2nd respondent for the post of ‘Shramiks’ and in turn the 2nd respondent issued call letters to them on 29.1.2011 calling them to appear on 16.2.2011 at 1.30 a.m before the screening committee along with required documents and certificates. Accordingly the petitioners appeared before the said committee and had shown their original certificates to the committee and they are waiting for the reply of the committee. So far the petitioners have not received any communication from the committee. Subsequently, the 1st petitioner made a representation to the 2nd respondent on 28.02.2011 under the Right to Information Act with a request to provide the copy of guidelines for selections to the post of ‘Shramiks’ and the percentages of the marks secured by selected candidates and the petitioners were informed that the cut of marks for the O.C candidates is 72.21%, for SC candidates 70.79% and for BC-B candidates 71.14%. Even though the petitioners got more percentage of marks than prescribed, they were not considered for appointment on the ground that they have passed the ITI compartmentally. Hence, the petitioners filed this writ petition. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that even though the petitioners secured more marks than the cut of marks fixed by the Selection Committee of the respondents, they were not considered for the posts of ‘Shramiks’ and hence the writ petition may be allowed. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents corporation contended that the case of the petitioners has already been considered by the respondents. Therefore, the question of reconsidering the petitioners for appointment of the posts of ‘Shramiks’ does not arise. As per the record, the entire selection process was over. But, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners some of the vacancies which are notified in pursuance of the notification dated 01.11.2010 have not been filled up by the respondents. Therefore, the case of the petitioners may be considered in case any selected persons have not joined in pursuance of the notification of the respondents dated 01.11.2010. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, if rules and regulations of the respondents-corporation permit them, they can reconsider the case of the petitioners for the appointment of the posts of ‘Shramiks’ in the case any selected persons have not joined in pursuance of the selection notification dated 01.11.2010. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ K.C. BHANU, J. June, 27, 2010 Gk. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.12259 of 2011 27th June, 2011 Gk.