IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7825 of 2009 Between: 1 T. Venkateshwara Swamy S/o. Laxmi Narsaiah H.T.No. 125, Warangal. 2 T. Srinath S/o. Narsimha Swamy H.T.No. 308, Warangal. 3 J. Salmon Raju S/o. Samuel Benjimen H.T.No. 151, H.No. 1-1-1455, Zion Nagar, Near F.C.I., Kazipet, Warangal. 4 A. Sadanandam S/o. Kankaiah H.T.No. 187, Warangal. 5 A. Sadanandam S/o. Chandraiah H.T.No. 268, Warangal. 6 S. Darshan Singh S/o. Keshava Singh H.T.No. 184, Warangal. 7 A. Venkateshwarlu S/o. Komuraiah H.T.No. 290, Warangal. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 State of A.P. Rep. by its Principal Secretary Revenue Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise Government of A.P. Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue any Writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or otherwise declaring the G.O.Ms.No.1103 Revenue (Ex.I) Dept. dated 17-08-2007 issued by the 1st Respondent as arbitrary, illegal, mala fide, unconstitutional violating Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from ultra virus to rule 3 of the A.P. Excise Subordinate Service Rules as well as the Presidential Order and also law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of V. Jagannadha Rao reported in 2002 SC 77 and State of Karnataka Vs. Uma Devi reported in 2006(4) SCC page 1 and set aside the same and further declare the Judgment of the Hon'ble Tribunal dt. 10-04-2008 in O.A.No.4927/2007 as equally arbitrary, illegal and erroneous and set aside the same, and issue consequential directions directing the Respondents to forthwith implement Government Memo No.32167 / Ex.1(2) / 2004-06 dated 08-06-2005 issued by the 1st Respondent and further direct the Respondents to consider the case of the petitioners and other similarly placed persons for appointment as Excise Constables in the existing vacancies before resorting to any other method taking into account the various directions given by the Hon'ble High Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.S.SRIDHAR Counsel for the Respondents.: GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following : ORDER (PER HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED): It is fairly conceded by learned counsel for the parties that the subject matter involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the common order of this Court passed in WP Nos.8573, 10432, 10581, 10658 and 21913 of 2008, dated 26.03.2009. 2. Following the said common order dated 26.03.2009 and for the reasons stated therein, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage in terms thereof. The operative portion of the said common order dated 26.03.2009 is in the following terms: “On above analysis of the matter, we direct the respondent- Government to consider giving exemption to the petitioners from subjecting themselves to physical efficiency tests of One Star and Three Star in addition to the age relaxation in view of the long lapse of time, in the posts of Excise Constables now sought to be filled-up, inasmuch as no recruitment has been taken up, the Government in all fairness should come forward to do justice to the petitioners and other similarly situated persons who are active and said to be around 200 in number.” No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED __________________________ JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Date:17th April, 2009. Tnb/cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}