IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 18171 of 2007 Between: R.Kotilingam, S/o.Sathaiah, 132/33/KVSS Mustyal, Jangaon Divsion,N.P.D.C.Of AP Ltd, Warangal Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 N.P.D.C. of A.P Ltd, Rep.by its Chairman & Managing Director, Opp. REC Petrol Bunk, Hanumakonda, Warangal Dist 2 The Superintending Engineer(Operation), N.P.D.C of A.P Ltd, Warangal Dist .....RESPONDENTS 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 or order or direction, especially one in the nature of writ of Mandamus: i. declare the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioner as contract JLM as illegal and arbitrary ii. consequently direct the respondents to appointment the petitioner as Contract JLM either in the exempting from participating in the pole climbing test or conducting the pole climbing test afresh iii and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VASUDEVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner worked as a contract labour in respect of a work entrusted by the respondents. In the recent past, the first respondent initiated steps to appoint Junior Lineman in various circles. Though fresh candidates were also eligible to be appointed, the scheme provided for preference in favour of the contract labour. Apart from holding the prescribed qualifications, the candidates are required to qualify in pole climbing test. The petitioner submitted his application and the same was processed. However, he did not pass in the pole climbing test, on account of the fact that he has undergone an operation at the relevant point of time. This writ petition is filed with a prayer to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner against future vacancies. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The selections for the notified posts have already taken place and admittedly, the petitioner did not qualify in the same. Therefore, it cannot be said that the respondents have committed any illegality in not selecting the petitioner. The petitioner states that he is a contract labour. If the future selections to be undertaken by the respondents, provided preference to contract labour and in case the petitioner fulfills the prescribed qualifications, his case can also be considered. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that as and when the respondents undertake selection and appointment to the post of Junior Lineman in future and in case the petitioner possesses the requisite qualifications, his case shall also be considered along with other eligible candidates. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________ 02.04.2008 kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}