A RATNAM Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions are filed questioning the judgment passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in various cases including O.A.Nos. 4496 of 2001 and batch dated 24-7-2001. This judgment shall dispose of all the writ petitions.

(2.) As the facts are almost similar in all the cases, we may take the case as projected in W.P.No. 15469 of 2001 which is filed against O.A.No. 4546 of 2001. The said O.A. was filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 by the petitioners herein praying for a declaration that the action of the respondents in not conducting the entrance test for crash course in the year 1989 as per notification dated 18-10-1989, and after conducting the same in the year 1995, not permitting the applicants/petitioners to complete the crash course till April 2000 is illegal, unjust, arbitrary, being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also praying for a consequential direction to the respondents to consider their cases in District Selection Committee selections 2001 ('DSC-2001' for brevity) by granting weightage marks and/or alternatively, to conduct a special DSC so far as the applicants are concerned. The Tribunal by the impugned judgment disposed of the OAs including O.A.No. 4546 of 2001 in the following terms. Therefore, in view of the above referred discussion, the applicants who have already availed the one time benefit that was granted by the Tribunal in O.A.No. 3863/2000 should not be allowed a further benefit for DSC-2001, but we are of the considered view that the applicants who have not availed the one time benefit so far in accordance with the judgment of the Tribunal in O.A. No. 3863/2000 dated 21-7-2000 be permitted to undergo the selection process by receiving their applications. However, if they are within the age limit prescribed by the Government or ordered by the APAT for DSC-2001, they are to be allowed as the crash course is conducted by the Government .............The OAs are disposed of accordingly with the above directions at the admission stage. No costs. A GLANCE AT PAST LITIGATION:

(3.) The history of the litigation leading to filing of the O.As. is a chequered one. We may notice the same in brief. The persons who are qualified in Secondary Grade Basic Teachers Training (SGBT) were eligible for being appointed as teachers in primary schools and upper primary schools. Prior to 1969, training was imparted in State-managed Basic Training Institutions. As there was a large surplus of teachers who are qualified in the SGBT institutions, the Government decided to close down the same. But in 1975, eleven Teacher Training Institutions (TTIs) were revived with the intake capacity of 150 students. The Government also changed its policy and decided to grant permission to private managements to establish TTIs. Though there was no permission to some institutions, in one or two cases, the Government permitted students to appear at the Government examination on sympathetic grounds. Encouraged by this, large number of unauthorised institutions came into existence. The Government then issued press notes warning the pubic that the candidates seeking admission in unauthorised TTIs are doing so at their own risk. In spite of this, the mushroom growth of TTIs did not abate. In the meanwhile, the Legislature enacted A.P. Education Act, 1982 ('the Act' for short). At that stage, unauthorised TTIs filed writ petitions questioning the policy in G.O.Ms.No. 169, Education, dated 19-2-1975 whereunder various conditions were stipulated for granting recognition to TTIs. The writ petitions were disposed of directing the Government to consider the applications of several TTIs. The Government considered and declined to grant permission. Another set of writ petitions were filed before the Supreme Court inter alia challenging the orders refusing permission to run the TTIs and also Sections 20 and 21 of the Act. The writ petitions were dismissed by the Supreme Court in Nageshwaramma v. State of A.P.1.