IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 1686 of 2008 Between: 1 The Commissioner and Director of School Education, A.P. Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector, Hyderabad District. 3 The District Educational officer, Hyderabad District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Yalaka Krishna Rao, Unemployee Jogampeta (V), Appayyapet (P) Seethanagaram Mandal, Vizianagaram District. 2 The Chief Executive Officer, Z.P. Hyderabad. (2nd Respondents is a formal parties no relief is sought against him) .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of "Writ of Certiorari" calling for the records relating to and connected with the order in OA no. 3215/2003 with M.A.No. 1386/2004 dt. 11-7-2006 on the file of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad and to quash or set aside the same by holding as erroneous and contrary to law and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: GP FOR SERVICES I Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the order dated 11.07.2006 passed in O.A. No. 3215 of 2003 and MA No. 1386 of 2004 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, and consequently to quash the same, the petitioners filed this writ petition. The respondent herein filed the above Original Application seeking to declare the action of the petitioners herein in not selecting him to the post of P.E.T. (Telugu), while selecting the persons who secured lesser marks, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The respondent herein, as a non- local candidate, applied for Physical Education Teacher (Telugu) and secured 66 marks in the written examination, but he was not selected. It is further averred that though there were five vacancies of the cadre, two candidates, who secured 51 and 58 marks, were selected. The case of the petitioners herein is that as per the Presidential Order, 80% of the posts under direct recruitment shall be reserved for locals and since there were only five vacancies and one vacancy was a backlog vacancy meant for locals, only one vacancy falls for open competition both for the locals and non-locals, o merit. It is further their case that since as per the norms, 20% for the open category comes to 0.80 and since as per the Presidential Order, fraction of a vacancy shall go to the locals only, the respondent is not entitled to the relief sought for. The Tribunal, on extensive consideration of the respective contentions, allowed the O.A. directing the petitioners herein to consider and appoint the respondent for the post of Physical Education Teacher (Telugu) of Hyderabad District in the vacancy reserved for Open Competition at roster point 48. Aggrieved thereby the present writ petition is filed inter alia contending that the faction of a post shall be counted as one and it shall be taken into local cadre and, as such, the Tribunal erred in directing the petitioners to appoint the respondent, who is a non-local. Admittedly, roster point 48 is meant for Open Competition. It is not in dispute that the respondent secured 66.5% marks in the examination and he belongs to Open Category and is a non-local. It is also not in dispute that five posts of Physical Education Teacher (Telugu) were notified. The averment that the respondent secured highest marks is not specifically denied by the petitioners. The Tribunal had the opportunity of going through the material relating to the recruitment and found that one vacancy was backlog and reserved for locals. Therefore, the respondent is not entitled to be considered for that post, being a non-local. Therefore, assessing the 20% of four posts as 0.80 and treating it to be one post, in terms of the Presidential Order, and since there was one post meant for open competition under roster point 48, directed the respondent to be appointed, being a topper in the written examination. The Tribunal ruled out the contention, in the absence of any provision that a fraction of a vacancy shall go to the locals only. Even before this court, the petitioners did not file any material in support of such a contention. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the Tribunal is justified in directing the petitioners herein to consider the appointment of respondent for the post of Physical Education Teacher (Telugu) in the vacancy reserved for Open Competition at roster point 48 Consequently, the writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. ____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. __________________ G.CHANDRAIAH, J. March 5, 2008 MAS.