THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.25940 of 2000 August 17, 2011 Between: T.Subhashini, D/o.Laxminarayana And others ... Petitioners And A.P. Administrative Tribunal, represented by its Registrar, Hyderabad And others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR WRIT PETITION No.25940 of 2000 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The petitioners, five in number, filed the instant writ petition seeking a direction to respondents 2 to 5 to consider their cases for the posts of Secondary Grade Teachers (SGTs) in Warangal District under DSC-1998 in the available vacancies, in the light of the orders of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.1903 of 1999, dated 12.10.2000 and O.A.No.5264 of 1999, 31.10.2000. Be it noted, in O.A.No.1903 of 1999 an interim order was passed whereas in O.A.No.5264 of 1999, a final order was passed. The petitioners 1 to 3 are applicants 12, 14 and 16 in O.A.No.1903 of 1999 whereas the petitioners 4 and 5 are applicants 3 and 4 in O.A.No.5264 of 1999. They filed the O.A.s before the learned Tribunal seeking a direction to respondents to sponsor applicants to the post of SGT. They contended that in the DSC-1998 they were successful both in the written and oral tests; but due to the pending litigation, with regard to appointment of the candidates with special T.T.C. crash course as SGTs, the results were not announced; and even though the second respondent directed to announce the results, their candidatures were not sponsored. The learned Tribunal disposed of O.A. No.5264 of 1999 directing the respondents to consider their case if they are eligible and have come up within the range of selection. A similar interim order was passed in O.A. No.1903 of 1999. There is no dispute that the selection pertains to DSC-1998. In fact, the learned Tribunal already passed orders directing the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners if they come up within the range of selection. The petitioner now complained that in spite of directions, the respondents did not consider their cases though there are clear vacancies. The respondents filed counter affidavit stating that the petitioners have not come up for the selection in their respective categories and, therefore, they were not considered as per the orders in G.O.Ms.No.221, dated 16.7.1994; no candidate who secured less then 45 marks in the written examination under BC-B category was considered for appointment and the last candidate under BC-B Women category secured 52 marks i.e., 47 marks in the written examination and 5 marks in the oral test. The counter averments remain unrebutted. Therefore, it is reasonable to draw inference that the petitioners were not selected because they did not secure required number of marks. We are, therefore, not inclined to issue any direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioners, after lapse of 13 years, when they did not come up within the range of selection. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. ________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) ___________________ (K.G.SHANKAR, J) August 17, 2011 YS