THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P.NO.23761 OF 2003 O R D E R (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) Heard the learned Government Pleader for Services – II for the petitioners and Sri J.M.Naidu, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Aggrieved by the order dated 03.04.2003 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in O.A.No.2866/2001 in directing the Government to consider the case of the applicant/respondent for appointment to the post of Panchayat Secretary or to any other post as per his eligibility in the revised village administrative set up of Panchayat Raj Department and to issue appointment officers, the present writ petition is filed. 3. The respondent filed WVMP.No.1602/2007 for vacating the interim suspension granted by this court on 12.11.2003. 4. Since the interim orders are in force for the last four years, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners – Government submitted that the post of Village Administrative Officer is abolished and the same is converted as Panchayat Secretary. The minimum qualification for the said post is that the candidate should have passed 10th class and as the respondent does not possess the said qualification, his case cannot be considered. He further submitted that even for consideration to the post of Village Administrative Officer at the relevant time, the minimum qualification was that a candidate should have passed 7th class. He submitted that though the respondent had passed the 9th class, since he did not possess the basic qualification of 7th class, his case could not be considered for the post of Village Administrative Officer and hence looking from any angle, the order of the Tribunal in directing to consider the case of the respondent and issue appointment orders, is not tenable. He further submitted that the age of the respondent as on today is about 57 years. Therefore, he sought for setting aside the impugned order. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the respondent had passed 9th class and the same has been accepted by the petitioners and further the respondent worked as Village Officer, having passed the prescribed test and though he appeared for the interview on 24.1.1992 as the posts were abolished, his case could not be considered. He further submitted that pursuant to the appeals filed by the respondent, the Commissioner of Land Revenue has directed the revenue authorities to consider the case of the respondent on merits, if he acquires minimum educational qualifications in future recruitment and further though the said post of VAO was abolished on 31.12.2001 those persons who were holding the post of VAO as on that day were ordered to be considered for appointment to the post of Panchayat Secretary. Therefore, as the respondent acquired the qualification of 9th class which is also admitted by the petitioners, and as the case of the respondent was not considered as per the orders of the Commissioner for Land Revenue, the petitioners may be directed to considered the respondent for appointment to any suitable post in Panchayatraj Department and hence the impugned order of the Tribunal does not warrant any interference and accordingly sought for dismissal of the writ petition. 7. From the material on record, it could be seen that the respondent applied for the post of Village Administrative Officer in the year 1992 and as he was not considered, he filed appeals before the District Collector and also before the Commissioner of Land Revenue and the Commissioner of Land Revenue directed that in case the applicant acquires the minimum qualification, his case may be considered in future recruitment. The post of Village Administrative Officers was abolished and were converted as Panchayat Secretaries under the Panchaytraj Department on 31.12.2001 and the persons who were holding the posts of V.A.Os. were ordered to be considered for appointment to the post of Panchayat Secretary. The respondent in the meanwhile acquired the qualification of 9th class. On the ground that the relief sought for by the respondent dates back to the year of 1992 and as the Commissioner for Land Revenue through his proceedings dated 16.11.1994 directed to consider the case of the petitioner if he acquires the minimum qualification and as the respondent passed the 9th class, which is admitted by the petitioners and that as the posts of Village Administrative Officers were transferred to Panchayat Raj Deparmtent on 31.12.2001 and had the case of the respondent was considered, he would have got in the year 1998 itself, the Tribunal directed the petitioners to consider the case of petitioner and issue appointment orders. 8. It is well settled that possessing higher qualification without the basic qualification, cannot be considered. The qualification required for the post of Village Administrative Officer as on the date of selection is 7th class. Admittedly, the respondent did not possess the minim qualification. Further, it is also to be noticed that as on 31.12.2001, the respondent was not holding the post of Village Administrative Officer, on which date, the posts were admittedly abolished and were converted as Panchayat Secretaries and hence the orders that were applicable to the existing V.A.Os. as on that date, will not be applicable to the case of the respondent. As per the G.O.Ms.No.369 PR & RD (Mdl.II) Department dated 12.12.2001, the Village Administrative Officer who has passed S.S.C. and above and below 58 years of age, is eligible for absorption as Panchayat Secretary. As noted above, the respondent was not appointed as Village Administrative Officer and further admittedly he did not possess the qualification of S.S.C., which is required for the post of Panchayat Secretary. Hence, in these circumstances, the case of the respondent cannot be considered, looking from any angle. The Tribunal oblivious of these circumstances and considering the orders of the Commissioner for Land Revenue, Hyderabad dated 16.11.1994 directed the petitioners to consider the case of the respondent. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the impugned order of the Tribunal cannot be sustained. 9. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order of the Tribunal. No costs. -------------------------------------------- -- T.MEENA KUMARI,J ------------------------------------------ ------ G.CHANDRAIAH,J AVS DATE:03.03.2008