THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 17551 OF 2008 O R D E R: The petitioners are working as Assistant Engineers in the Northern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Limited. They feel aggrieved by the proposed action of respondents 1 and 2, to undertake limited recruitment, to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineers, with the candidates, who have ﬁgured in the list communicated, vide letter dated 8.8.2008. They plead that it is in contravention of Regulation 24(1)(a) and B.P. (P&G-Per) Ms.No.82, dated 17.5.1993, and complain that they were wrongly excluded from the process. They also claim the relief in the form of a direction to the respondents, not to aﬀect promotions to the cadre of Assistant Divisional Engineers, in contravention of Regulations. The petitioners state that respondents 1 to 4 are relaxing, one after the other rules, favouring a particular section of Assistant Engineers, be it in the context of conferring eligibility, or removing the disqualiﬁcations for making general or limited recruitment to the said post. It is pleaded that the list furnished to them, vide letter dated 8.8.2008, contains the names of several persons, including respondents 5 to 14, who are not qualified for limited recruitment. Sri S. Sharath Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that B.P.Ms.No.82, dated 17.5.1993, which prescribes the qualiﬁcations for the post of Assistant Divisional Engineers and the method of recruitment, excludes the persons facing disciplinary proceedings from consideration, even from limited recruitment, and the list furnished by the respondents includes such candidates. He further submits that the petitioners are entitled to be considered for limited recruitment, to the extent of 20%, as provided for under B.P.Ms.No.82. Reference is also made to the subject matter of W.P.No.1563 of 2008, wherein this court passed an interlocutory order. Sri P.R. Balarami Reddy, learned counsel for respondents 1 to 4, and Sri G.Vidya Sagar, learned counsel for respondent No.7, oppose the writ petition, on several grounds. The petitioners have approached this court, on an earlier occasion, by ﬁling W.P.No.1563 of 2008, challenging the order passed by the 1st respondent in N.O.O.(CGM-HRD) Ms.No.301, dated 19.01.2008, which provided for relaxation of qualiﬁcations, in the context of reckoning the regular period of service to confer eligibility for appointment to superior post. After taking note of the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioners and respondents 1 to 4, this court permitted the selections to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineers, to go on, subject, however, to the condition that 10 posts shall be kept vacant, so that the petitioners can be accommodated, in the event of the writ petition, being allowed. The present writ petition is in relation to appointment to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineers only. While the earlier writ petition was about the general recruitment, the grievance of the petitioners, in this writ petition, at present, is about the limited recruitment, to the extent of 20%. A perusal of B.P.Ms.No.82, dated 17.5.1993, discloses that the limited recruitment to the extent of 20% for the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer, is not a separate exercise. The relevant rule reads as under: i) 20% of the total vacancies shall be ﬁled through limited recruitment by candidates from the merit list, referred to in clause (ii) below, selected from eligible Assistant engineers to the extent of 4 times of the vacancies as per seniority list of the Assistant Engineers. The seniority list will be prepared after screening by the Departmental Promotion Committee by excluding those not cleared on account of unﬁtness or disciplinary cases pending. ii) A merit list of candidates selected for recruitment shall be drawn based on the performance in a written test and after giving weightages as detailed below: Marks Performance in the written test 50 Weightage for relative seniority 40 Acquisition of P.G. qualification 5 Annual Performance Reports 5 iii) A candidate coming up in the merit list for limited recruitment shall not be placed lower in rank than that which he/she would have otherwise had, but for his/her inclusion in the merit list.” A perusal of this rule discloses that a merit list for the other vacancies is to be prepared, stretching the area of consideration to 4 times the vacancies, and from out of the merit list so prepared, candidates for 20% of the vacancies are to be selected, purely on the basis of merit. Therefore, it is not a process independent of the general recruitment. When the general recruitment is already the subject matter of the previous writ petition, the petitioners cannot make out a separate grievance, as regards the limited recruitment. They can plead these grounds, in the pending writ petition also. Further, in case the petitioners perceive any special grounds vis-à-vis limited recruitment, to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineers, they can certainly ﬁle necessary application for amendment of the prayer in W.P.No.1563 of 2008. This court does not find any basis to grant any relief to the petitioners. The writ petition is disposed of, with the above observation and direction. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ 26th August 2008 PAN