LAWS(APH)-2001-3-139

Y SEKHAR Vs. GOVT OF A P

Decided On March 08, 2001
Y.SEKHAR Appellant
V/S
GOVT.OF A.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein along with other five students questioned an order dated 1-1-2000 being G.O. Ms. No.1, Health, Medical and Family Welfare Department before A.P. Administrative Tribunal on the ground that the same is violative of the Constitutional guarantees as regards the protection of rights of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates as also Rule 22 of A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules.

(2.) Originally, the applicants were six in number before the Tribunal. But this writ petition has been filed by only one of them. They were, at all material times and still are studying in BUMS course. 16 vacancies in the reserved category belonging to Scheduled Castes and nine vacancies belonging to Scheduled Tribes were notified in Indian Medicine and Homoeopathy Department. By reason of the impugned GO, 25 vacancies of the post of Medical Officer (Unani) reserved for Scheduled Castes are sought to be filled up by open category candidates on the ground that on earlier three occasions, no suitable reserved candidate was available. The learned Tribunal rejected the said application inter alia on the ground that the petitioners have no locus standi. It further came to the conclusion that having regard to the fact that equal number of future vacancies will be filled by the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates, no prejudice has been caused to them.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner inter alia submitted that having regard to the Constitutional provision contained in clause (4) of Article 15 of the Constitution, it was obligatory on the part of the respondents herein to continue to keep reserved the posts for being filled up by the candidates belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and the purported de-reservation thereof by reason of the impugned memo is ultra vires. It was submitted that having regard to the fact that if such a course of action is resorted to, the State is obligated to follow a particular procedure which has not been done in the instant case.