THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO W.P.NO. 16834 of 2010 16-07-2010 BETWEEN; G.Chalapathi ...Petitioner vs. The Joint Collector/Chairman, Task Force Committee, Anantapur District and others ...Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO W.P.NO. 16834 of 2010 ORAL ORDER: (Per GR,J) The petitioner is the 3rd respondent in O.A.No.7598 of 2009 filed by the 3rd respondent herein, which was allowed by the learned A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (the Tribunal) by the order dated 24-06-2010 along with another application, O.A.No.3709 of 2007. The 3rd respondent filed the O.A.No.7598 of 2009 claiming to be a 100% visually handicapped person belonging to B.C.”A” category, qualified for appointment as Kamati. The official respondents herein addressed the District Employment Exchange to sponsor names for filling up vacancies in Kamati post without giving wide publicity about the vacancies and selection. The 3rd respondent filed O.A.No.7602 of 2008 seeking consideration of his case as well, during interview for the post of Kamati. By an order of the Tribunal dated 16-09-2008, O.A.No.7602 of 2008 was disposed of directing the respondents therein to permit the 3rd respondent to the interview for the post of Kamati along with other candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange, subject to his eligibility and suitability to the post. Consequent on the above order of the Tribunal, the 3rd respondent was called for interview on 28-09-2008. The official respondents, however, ignored his candidature and selected the petitioner herein who obtained lesser marks. According to the 3rd respondent in O.A.7598 of 2009, he secured 45 marks at the interview while the petitioner herein secured only 32 marks. However, the petitioner was selected ignoring his rightful and legitimate claim, was the grievance that triggered O.A.No.7598 of 2009, seeking appropriate relief. In the counter-affidavit to O.A.No.7598 of 2009, the official respondents curiously pleaded that the 3rd respondent herein had appeared for the interview only on the basis of the earlier order of the Tribunal dated 16-09-2008 in O.A.No.7602 of 2008; he was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange as he did not have adequate seniority in the Employment Exchange, warranting his sponsorship for the post of Kamati; that the list submitted by the District Employment Exchange for the two posts of Kamati stopped at the year 11-04-1991 and the 3rd respondent did not figure therein; and that the selection committee rightly did not consider the 3rd respondent for appointment as Kamati since candidates sponsored by the District Employment Exchange though with lesser qualifications were available and the petitioner was not sponsored by the Employment Exchange. The Tribunal rightly characterised this defence by the official respondents as contumacious and perverse and quashed the selection of the petitioner and directed the official respondents herein to follow the principles set out in the judgment of the Supreme Court in Excise Superintendent Malkpatnam, Krishna District, A.P. Vs. K.B.N.Visweshwara Rao and Others [ (1996) 6 SCC 216] with regard to the modalities to be followed while recruiting the candidates including from the Employment Exchange and directed the official respondents to conduct a de novo selection process after giving a general notification and further directed to consider all the candidates including those sponsored by the Employment Exchange. The Tribunal declined specific relief to the 3rd respondent herein as the official respondents failed to follow the procedure for recruitment ordained by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Visweshwara Rao (Supra). This court discerns no infirmity either in the application of law or exercise of discretion by the Tribunal, warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. The order of the Tribunal insofar as allowing O.A.No.7598 of 2009 is impeccable. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. No order as to costs. ______________ GODA RAGHURAM,J ______________ R.KANTHA RAO, J 16th JULY 2010. TSNR