The Government Of Andhra ... vs P. Bhaskar & Ors

24667-24668 of 2005 are filed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh and the other Appeals are filed by the officers who were aggrieved by the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petitions Nos. 10604/2004 and 10965/2005. The writ petitioners in W.P. No. 10604/2004 filed OA No. 6246 of 1998 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short "the Tribunal") contending that they should be declared as seniors to the Deputy Collectors who were appointed on 9.12.1993, though they were appointed as Deputy Collectors on 9.12.1994.

3. The facts, in short, are as follows.

4. Meanwhile, as part of the general recruitment, the Commission had issued advertisement on 1.8.1990 inviting applications with a view to undertake recruitment to different categories of posts in Group 1 and 2(a) of the Andhra Pradesh State Service, including the category of Deputy Collector. This selection consisted of both 'general recruitment' and 'limited recruitment'. The process of selection consisted of preliminary examination and final examination. A preliminary examination was held on 27.1.1991, but on 5.2.1991 the Government of Andhra Pradesh revised the maximum age limit of the candidates. In view of this relaxation of age granted to the candidates, fresh applications were called for and for additional applicants a preliminary examination was held on 14.4.1991. The Commission prescribed '88' marks as cut-off marks and the main examination was held on 9.11.1991. Some Original Applications were filed before the State Administrative Tribunal challenging the selection process. The Tribunal gave certain directions. These OAs were disposed of by the Tribunal on 4.6.1992 with the following directions :-

f) To dispel grievances regarding valuation in the second preliminary examination, it is appropriate that the Commission publishes on its notice-board and makes available for inspection by any candidate, list of marks obtained by candidates who are called for oral test on the basis of the result in the main examination as per direction (a).

6. As regards limited recruitment undertaken earlier, written test was held in May 1993 and selected candidates were appointed on 9.12.1994. The appellants who were appointed on 9.12.1994 filed O.A. No. 6246/1998 before the Tribunal claiming that they were entitled to be placed above the candidates selected and appointed as Deputy Collectors on 9.12.1993. The Tribunal rejected their claim of seniority and held that they were not entitled to be placed above the Deputy Collectors who were appointed on 9.12.1993.

For the selection for these vacancies the result of the main examination already held together with the oral test or interview shall be basis. The Commission has to take steps to call for interview such number of candidates as are required in terms of the advertisement, keeping in view the vacancies and the ranking of the candidate in the main examination. This process should be completed expeditiously preferably within a period of four months.

14. The contention of the Counsel for the respondents that Rule 22(ii)(e) has application in a situation where general recruitment is held and when sufficient number of reserved category candidates were not available and then Government orders for a limited recruitment, such limited recruitment confining to reserved candidates shall be made immediately after the general recruitment.

17. As the contesting respondents were appointed as Deputy Collectors vide G.O.M. Order No. 1251 dated 9.12.1994 they are not entitled to be placed above the Deputy Collectors who were appointed vide G.O.M. Order No. 1265 dated 9.12.1993. The Appeals arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 24667-24668 of 2005 filed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh are allowed.

18. The Appeals arising out of SLP (C) No. 25382-25383 of 2005; SLP (C) No. 26434-26435 of 2005 and SLP (C) No. 26436-26437 of 2005 are accordingly disposed of in the light of the Judgment in the appeal filed by the State.