THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1515 of 2006 Dated: 30.01.2006 Between: G.Parvathi Devi W/o. Shanti Babu Antarvedipalem Firka Development Junior college, Makilipuram, East Godavari district, R/o.Malikipuram, E.G.District ..... PETITIONER AND State of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary Department of Higher Education, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 1515 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioner was selected and appointed as Junior Lecturer in Telugu in the fifth respondent Junior College against an unaided vacancy, in the selection that took place on 21.09.1998. The Board of Intermediate Education, third respondent herein, accorded its approval for the appointment of the petitioner and six other Junior Lecturers in different subjects, through its proceedings dated 17.12.1998. The petitioner states that out of seven Junior Lecturers, whose appointments were approved by the third respondent, two of them, namely, J.L.N. Raju, Junior Lecturer in English and R.V. Ramaraju, Junior Lecturer in Economics, were adjusted and appointed against the aided vacancies, and such an action was approved by the Government, through its orders in G.O.Rt. No. 159, dated 16.02.2001 and G.O.Rt. No. 720, dated 06.10.2000, respectively. The grievance of the petitioner is that, similar benefit is not accorded to her, though there exists a clear aided vacancy of Junior Lecturer in Telugu. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education, and also the learned Standing Counsel for Board of Intermediate Education. The very purpose of requiring the Private Educational Institutions to follow the stipulated procedure in the matter of appointments, even against the unaided vacancies, and requiring them to be approved is, to enable the candidates, who are selected and approved, to be appointed as against the aided vacancy, as and when the situation demands. The appointment of the petitioner as Junior Lecturer in Telugu was approved by the competent authority, i.e., the third respondent, on 17.12.1998. A perusal of the Government orders referred to above, discloses that two candidates, whose appointments were approved along with that of the petitioner, were appointed by transfer against aided vacancies in their respective subjects. If the petitioner stands on the same footing vis-à-vis, the aided vacancy in Telugu subject, there is no reason as to why she must not be extended the same benefit. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to pass appropriate orders in the matter of appointment of the petitioner by transfer against the existing aided vacancy of Junior Lecturer in Telugu in the fifth respondent college, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 28.01.2006 sh