AMARTHALUR YESU MARIAMMA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A.P REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY CIVIL SUPPLIES SECRETARIAT HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri D. Radha Krishna, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for the respondents. The Sub-Collector, Tenali, through his notification, dated 19.12.2011, invited applications from Scheduled Castes-General candidates for appointment as a fair price shop dealer at Kollapalem Village, Bhattiprolu Mandal, Tenali Division, Guntur District. Applications were received till 05.00 p.m. on 03.01.2012. The notification itself made it clear that the written test will be conducted at the Sub-Collector's Office at 10.30 a.m. on 08.01.2012 and the eligible candidates will be informed for attending to the interviews to be held later on. The writ petitioner is one such candidate, who has responded to the said notification for the fair price shop dealership at Kollapalem. The written test was conducted on 08.01.2012 and results have been published on the same day. The following five candidates are declared as eligible 1) Sri Kanaparthi Naga Raju, 2) Sri Cheekati Babu Rajendra Prasad, 3) Sri Neela Arjuna Rao, 4) Ms. Amarthaluri Srilakshmi and 5) Sri Neela Peda Venkateswara Rao. Though the writ petitioner has secured 21 marks at the written examination, she was declared as disqualified for interview. In other words, it is pointed out that she is not called for interview.

(2.) Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has drawn my attention to the results declared for Yadlapalli Village where four candidates were declared as eligible for interviews and fourth amongst them was one Smt. Devalla Kamala, who secured 20 marks in the written examination. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that for Yadlapalli Village, the Sub-Collector has declared a candidate, who has secured 20 marks at the written examination as eligible, whereas in this case though the petitioner has secured 21 marks, she has been declared as ineligible. This treatment, according to the learned counsel for the writ petitioner, amounts to rank discrimination. Further, the notification, which has been issued by the Sub-Collector on 19.12.2011, has not specified any norms for segregating the candidates as eligible for interview and disqualified for interview. Therefore, without publishing the norms, the Sub-Collector has been acting unilaterally and arbitrarily. It is further contended that the writ petitioner is already working as a temporary dealer for Kollapalem Village and hence, she ought to have given preference in the matter of selection as a regular fair price shop dealer.

(3.) I am afraid that not one of these contentions contains any merit. The learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has drawn my attention to the policy formulations framed by the State Government and announced through their G.O.Ms. No. 4 Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies (C.S.I) Department, dated 19.02.2011, containing the revised guidelines for selection and appointment of fair price shop dealers under the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008. In the annexure to the said CO., the detailed revised guidelines for selection have been spelt out. It would appropriate to notice that para 2 thereof dealt with the written test, interview and the selection procedure. It is pointed out therein that the appointing authority shall conduct a written test, generally on the existing public distribution system and the records to be maintained by the fair price shop dealer to assess as to whether the applicant is aware of the requirements and functioning of the public distribution system in the State and demonstrate as to whether they can effectively function for implementation of the public distribution system. It is further pointed therein that the written examination shall be for 50 marks and the qualified candidates, who secure 20 and above out of 50 marks shall be called for viva voce interview on a date to be indicated by the appointing authority. The guidelines further proceeded to specify that the ratio between the vacancies proposed to be filled and the candidate to be invited for interview shall be 1:5. However, if the number of candidates qualified in the written test is less than 5, the appointing authority has been granted the liberty to confine the ratio to the exact number of qualified candidates in the written test. If the number of qualified candidates in the written test are more than 5, it shall be restricted to five candidates only based on the ranking obtained by them at the written test. Thus, guideline No. 2 makes the position clear that for every vacancy, the best five candidates in the order of merit at the written examination should be called for interview. The minimum marks or qualifying marks are also specified as 20 out of 50. It is no doubt true that the writ petitioner has secured 21 out of 50 marks and thus, she became qualified in the written examination, but however, when the merit order is drawn for Kollapalem fair price shop, Sri Nagaraju and Sri Babu Rajendra Prasad both secured the maximum marks of 33 while the other three candidates, namely Sri Neela Arjuna Rao, Ms. Amarthaluri Srilakshmi and Sri Neela Peda Venkateswara Rao secured 28 marks each. Thereafter, one Sri Vasu Babu secured 25 marks and one Ms. Madhu Priya secured 22 marks. The writ petitioner and another candidate Sri Narasimham have secured 21 marks each in the written examination. Thus, seven candidates have secured more marks than the writ petitioner and hence, the Joint Collector has confined the choice of interviewing the top five candidates only. In that process, the writ petitioner, though is qualified in the written examination, could not secure the necessary merit ranking to end up within the first five candidates to be interviewed. Whereas in the case of Yadlapalli, it appears only four candidates have secured 20 or more marks. One Sri Tata Siva has secured only 27 marks, while Ms. Krishnaveni and Ms. Naga Lakshmi secured 24 marks each, one Ms. Kamala secured 20 marks. That is the reason why all these four candidates, who have qualified at the written examination for Yadlapalli Village, have been declared as eligible for interview test. No comparison therefore, can be drawn with the performance of the candidates for Yadlapalli and Kollapalem fair price shops. As is already made out, for Kollapalem, candidates, who have secured less than 28 marks, could not make the grade for interview, whereas for Yadlapalli, the first ranker himself has secured 24 marks. It is therefore, a clear case where the Joint Collector, Tenali went strictly by the revised guidelines announced by the State Government and contained in their G.O.Ms. No. 4, dated 19.02.2011. In the absence of any sustainable challenge to the revised guidelines contained in G.O.Ms. No. 4, dated 19.02.2011 by the writ petitioner, the contentions canvassed are not sustainable.