IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO : 21921 of 2008 Between: G. Laxman, S/o Laxmaiah, aged about 35 Years, Attender, Z.P. Secondary School, Kolanooru, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Karimnagar. 2. The Headmaster, Z.P. Secondary School, Kolanooru, Karimnagar District. 3. The Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment, 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 will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the judgment of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.7714 of 2003, dated 30-04-2008 and the Proc.No.A3/4825/99, dated 13-11-2003 issued by the Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Z.P., Karimnagar and its connected orders in Proc.No.45/2003, dated 20-11-2003 issued by the Headmaster, Z.P.H.S., Kolanuru of Odella Mandal, Karimnagar District and struck down the same and consequently hold that the petitioner is entitled to continue as Attender in Z.P. Karimnagar with all consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.D.BALA KISHEN RAO Counsel for the Respondents : Smt. G. Elisha, Standing Counsel for ZPPS and MPPS for Telangana Region The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the order of the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal (for short “the Tribunal”) in O.A. No.7714 of 2003, dated 30-04-2008. The petitioner claims that he was appointed as Attender on 15-07-1999 under limited recruitment and was working as such from 20-07-1999 in Z.P.S. School, Kamanpoor, Karimnagar District. His services were regularized and he was declared to have satisfactorily completed the period of probation in the said post and he was being granted periodical increments regularly. It is stated that based on the order of the Tribunal in O.A. No.4789 of 1999, dated 23-06-2000, to which the petitioner is not a party, directing for re-examination of the selection process, the petitioner was given a notice on 19-01-2001 to show cause as to why his services should not be terminated, on the ground that he scored less marks than applicants 1 and 2 therein in the qualifying examination i.e., VII class. Questioning the said show-cause notice, he filed O.A. No.1721 of 2001 and the same is pending. Pursuant to another notice, dated 27-10-2003 issued by the 1st respondent, he appeared before the 1st respondent and submitted representation, dated 13-11-2003 and without considering his representation properly, the 1st respondent by proceedings No.A3/4825/99, dated 13-11-2003 terminated his services and consequent to which, the 2nd respondent relieved him of his duties by proceedings No.45/2003, dated 20-11-2003. Aggrieved by the same, he filed O.A. No.7714 of 2003 and the Tribunal by order dated 30-04-2008 dismissed the said O.A., which is impugned in this writ petition. Sri D. Balakishen Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as the petitioner was appointed in the selection made by District Selection Committee and since his period of probation in the said post was declared to have been completed satisfactorily and he continued as such without break of service, his services could not have been terminated at this length of time. He also submitted that there are existing vacancies of Attender under the control of Zilla Parishad, Karimnagar and, if at all the applicants in O.A. No.4789 of 1999 have to be appointed, they can be appointed in such existing vacancies without terminating the services of the petitioner. On the other hand, Smt. Dhanalakshmi V.M., learned counsel representing Smt. G. Elisha, learned Standing Counsel for Zilla Parishads and Mandal Praja Parishads, Telangana Region submitted that pursuant to the orders of the Tribunal, dated 23-06-2000 in O.A. No.4789 of 1999 filed by some of the unsuccessful candidates, directing to examine the VII class marks lists of all the candidates and consider the cases of applicants 1 and 2 therein for appointment as Attenders, if necessary, by reverting the junior-most selected candidates, the marks lists of all such candidates were verified and it was found that the petitioner secured less marks than applicants 1 and 2 in O.A. No.4789 of 1999, and therefore, applicants 1 and 2 in O.A. No.4789 of 1999 were appointed by terminating the services of the petitioner and another candidate. She, therefore, states that there is no illegality in terminating the services of the petitioner. Under given facts and circumstances, we do not find any legal infirmity in the impugned order. The contention of the petitioner that his services could not have been terminated, because after his appointment, his services were regularized and probation declared, cannot be sustained, inasmuch as in the re-examination of selection process, he was found unsuccessful due to getting less marks in the qualifying examination than that of other competing candidates. Any appointment to a post would be subject to merit, and since the petitioner was found to have secured less marks than other candidates, he could not have been appointed, but since his appointment was irregular, his services were terminated. The further contention of the petitioner that the orders of the Tribunal in O.A. No.4789 of 1999 cannot bind him, unless he is made a party thereto, also cannot be countenanced, because before terminating his services, in compliance with the said orders of the Tribunal, he was given ample opportunity by way of show cause notice and another notice, besides personal hearing before the 1st respondent. Therefore, we see no ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to make a representation to the 1st respondent within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, for considering his case in any existing vacancy, and if any such representation is made, the same shall be disposed of in accordance with law uninfluenced by the dismissal of the writ petition. No order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 30-09-2008 Svv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies 3.The Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Karimnagar. 4.The Headmaster, Z.P. Secondary School, Kolanooru, Karimnagar District. 5.The Commissioner, Panchayat Raj and Rural Employment, A.P., Hyderabad. Form-NIC-OGS/WP{ }