THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA W.P.No. 2600 of 2006 Date: 20.01.2011 Between : J.L.Satish Kumar, S/o. J.D.Prasada Rao Aged about 28 years, Occ: Unemployee Residing at D.No. 25-10-17/6, Narasimharaopet Near Sai Baba Temple, Eluru West Godavari District. … Petitioner And 1. The District Collector, West Godavari District At Eluru & 2 others. … Respondents ORDER: The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 01.02.2006 passed by the 2nd respondent being illegal and arbitrary. He has further prayed that the 1st and 2nd respondents be directed to accord an approval for appointment of the petitioner to the post of secondary grade teacher in pursuance to the selections made on 29.05.2003. The brief facts of the case are, that the 3rd respondent issued paper notification in “Eenadu” daily dated 05.03.2003 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for appointment to the post of secondary grade assistant (school), which is an aided post. In pursuance to the said notification, the petitioner along with the other candidates submitted their applications for consideration of their candidature for the said post. All the eligible candidates were called for a written test by the 3rd respondent on 29.05.2003 and the candidates who passed in the written test were interviewed on the same day. The selected list was sent to the 2nd respondent for approval. It is the case of the petitioner, that he was selected for the post of secondary grade assistant (school) and his name was recommended to the 2nd respondent. However, the 2nd respondent vide order dated 02.12.2003 cancelled the recommendation on the ground that the number of candidates who appeared for the interview was much less. The 2nd respondent further directed that fresh selections be made for the advertised post. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner had succeeded in the written test, as well as in interview, conducted in pursuance to the notification issued by the 3rd respondent, he was selected and his name was recommended for appointment. Therefore, the 2nd respondent could not deny his appointment merely on the ground that there are less number of students and further on the ground that very few candidates appeared for the interview. Learned counsel further submits that the total strength of the 3rd respondent institution was 202/158 and to say that, only 5 posts were adequate for the aforesaid mentioned number of students and to say that 6 posts are not required for such number of students. Learned counsel further submits that, in case, the number of students are less, then the petitioner can be transferred to some other aided institution and rested there. But in any case, the petitioner cannot be denied upon it. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent, wherein it has been averred that the Government in G.O.Ms.No. 103, dated 05.08.2005, issued instructions not to take up any selections for filling up of the aided posts and that, a committee was constituted for visiting the school to obtain strength particulars. It has been averred that, as the total strength of the institution was 202/158, which was adequate only for 5 posts out of the 6 sanctioned posts, no appointment could be made to the 3rd respondent institution. In reply to the aforesaid mentioned contentions, the counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the instructions were issued by the Government on 5.8.2005, where as, in the present case, the post was advertised on 05.03.2003 and hence, the Government order dated 05.08.2005 would have no retrospective effect and would not be applicable to the facts of the present case. Heard the counsel for the parties at length. It is not in dispute that the petitioner appeared for the written test as well as the interview in pursuance to the notification dated 05.03.2003. While large applications were invited from eligible candidates to the post of secondary grade assistant (school) which was an aided post, the petitioner having qualified in the written test and was also found eligible after the interview, his appointment for the post of secondary grade assistant could not have been denied as the proposals had also been sent in this regard to the 2nd respondent. Even assuming for the sake of arguments that the number of posts required with the 3rd respondent were only ‘5’ instead of ‘6’, then in that event, the petitioner could always be transferred to some other institution, where the strength of secondary grade assistants was less. The petitioner had been selected in pursuance of the notification issued by the Government and hence could not be denied his appointment on flimsy grounds. The argument on behalf of the 2nd respondent that the government issued order on 05.08.2005 instructing not to take up any selections for filling up of aided post till the strength of the school was verified also cannot be accepted as the aforementioned Government order was passed much after the petitioner was selected, i.e. on 30.05.2003. In view of the above, the order dated 01.02.2006 is quashed and directions are issued to the 1st and 2nd respondents to accord necessary approval for appointment of the petitioner for the post of secondary grade assistant/teacher, in pursuance of the selections made on 29.05.2003. The needful be done expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three moths from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. In case, the strength of the school in which the petitioner is to be posted is less, then the petitioner may be transferred to any other school on the aided post. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J Dt: 20th January, 2011 Ysk/Rns HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA W.P.NO. 2600 OF 2006 20th January, 2011