HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI W.P.NO.23420 OF 2010 Dt.27.09.2010 Between: Suda Sridhar ..Petitioner And The Post Master General, A.P. Circle, Hyderabad and others ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI W.P.NO.23420 OF 2010 ORDER: (Per Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) Petitioner questions the order of the District Legal Services Authority, Guntur, in P.L.C.No.887 of 2008, dated 25.11.2008, in closing the petition filed before the District Legal Services Authority, which was filed to direct respondents 1 and 2 herein to reinstate the petitioner with back wages and pass appropriate orders. It is the case of the petitioner before the District Legal Services Authority under Section 22-A of the Legal Services Authority Act that he was appointed for the post of Extra Department Packer on 26.2.1999 and prior to that he was temporarily worked in the year 1998 in Trunk Road Post Office and also Collectorate Post Office and ultimately he was appointed as Extra Department Packer, Bazaar Post Office, Guntur. While so, he was removed from service on 9.5.2000 without any reasons and without giving any notice. It is stated that he is entitled for regularization of service and in spite of several representations and legal notice there was no reply and therefore he filed Pre-litigation Case for reinstatement of the petitioner with back wages. In the said Pre-litigation Case, the Superintendent of Post Offices, Guntur Division, 2nd respondent herein, filed a counter and basing on the said counter, the petition was closed. In the counter it is stated that one A.V.Srinivas filed O.A.No.384 of 1999 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, against the Sub Divisional Inspector (Postal) Guntur South Sub-Division, Guntur in disengaging the services of A.V.Srinivas and engaging the services of the petitioner herein on casual basis. From the perusal of the said order of the Tribunal reveals that the petitioner herein was appointed as a provisional E.D. Packer of the Post Office on 26.2.1999. Thereafter, a regular notification for recruitment of Extra Department Candidates was issued on 27.2.1999. Pursuant to the said notification, it appears that the petitioner herein and the said A.V.Srinivas as well as one N.Vijayakumar also applied for the said post. It is stated that the said A.V.Srinivas got 227 marks, whereas the petitioner got 327 marks and the petitioner is more meritorious. But, however, the Tribunal dismissed the said O.A. directing the respondents to finalize the notification, dated 27.2.1999. In the counter filed before the Legal Services Authority it is stated that the selection could not be finalized till the disposal of the said O.A.No.384 of 1999 and after dismissal of the said O.A., the selection process is finalized and N.Vijayakumar, who is most meritorious candidate among the petitioner and he was selected and appointed on 9.5.2000. It is stated that the petitioner was appointed on 26.2.1999 purely on temporary basis with a condition that his service is liable to be terminated at any time without assigning any reasons. On making regular appointment to the said post, his services are terminated and regular appointment was made and the said meritorious candidate also joined in the said post on 9.5.2000. The petitioner has not chosen to question the said appointment of N.Vijayakumar and therefore it cannot be said that the petitioner was erroneously removed on 9.5.2000, as his appointment was purely temporary. We do not see any merits in the writ petition. We are of the opinion that the District Legal Services Authority ought to have passed a reasoned order after considering the material available on record. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to question the said selection process. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. _________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J. 27.9.2010 kpr