IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND NINE PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6009 of 2009 Between: Ahmed Ali ..... Petitioner AND The Chairman & Managing Director, Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Corporation Limited, Khairatabad, Hyderabad & others. .....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri N. Ramesh Counsel for respondents 1&2: Sri P.R. Balarami Reddy SC for A.P. Transco Counsel for respondent No.3: Sri M.V. Jaykumar This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6009 of 2009 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not valuing the examination paper of the petitioner in proper perspective and in not revaluing his answer paper, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to revalue his Accounts Test for Subordinate Officers Paper I. The petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Clerk in the Andhra Pradesh Central Power Distribution Corporation Limited, respondent No.1 (for short ‘the Corporation’). In order to be qualified for promotion to the post of Upper Division Clerk, an employee shall pass departmental test, which include Accounts Test for Subordinate Officers Part-I. The petitioner did not succeed in getting through the said test held in February, 2008. He again appeared for the examination held in the month of November, 2008. On the ground that the respondents declared him as failed even in his second attempt, the petitioner filed this writ petition for the reliefs referred to above. Heard Sri N. Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The plea based on which this writ petition is rested is that though the petitioner has fared well in the written examination, he is not declared to have passed the same. The petitioner has not laid any foundation to support his claim of having fared well in the test. Though the petitioner filed a copy of the question paper, he neither discussed the nature of questions with reference to which he answered them nor he has given any notice to the respondents before filing this writ petition pointing out the areas, if any, where the valuation of the answer papers would have gone wrong. He has not alleged any mala fides against the respondents or those who are involved in valuation of his answer script. Mere assertion without any supporting material that he fared well in the examination does not stand scrutiny of this Court because ordinarily it is for the employer, who should assess the performance of its employees in the departmental test and the Court does not sit as an appellate authority in this regard. The scope of jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being limited to interfere in cases of patent illegalities and manifest arbitrariness and the petitioner having failed to point out any such infirmities, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition on the mere apprehension that the respondents may not have properly valued his answer script. In this view of the matter, the writ petition is dismissed as meritless. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition as meritless, WPMP.No.7853 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also dismissed. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 23.03.2009 ES