K SRINIVASA RAO Vs. ANDHRA PRADESH ADMINISTRATIVE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners herein, who are the applicants before the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, filed these Writ Petitions against the orders dated 30-09-2011 of A.P. Administrative Tribunal in dismissing their O.As. As these Writ Petitions arise from the common orders passed in original Applications by the Tribunal and they involve common questions of fact and law, they are disposed of by this common order. As the facts in all the cases are similar, the facts in W.P No.32372 of 2011 herein are referred. W.P.No.32372 of 2011 is filed against the order in O.A.No.6598 of 2010. The said O.A was filed to declare the action of the respondents 2 and 3 herein in not sending the petitioner herein for medical examination in respect of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector pursuant to the notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 issued by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, Hyderabad as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner in the said O.A that pursuant to the notification No.45/ 2008 dated 30-12-2008 issued by the A.P. Public Service Commission inviting applications from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009, they have applied for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors and produced all the original documents relating to the academic qualifications and with regard to the Heavy Vehicle Driving License as required under the Rules. He got motor Driving License with 3 years experience of driving motor vehicles and aged more than 21 years. His license expired on 22-12-2008 and it was renewed on 23-1-2009 as per the provisions contained in the Motor Vehicles Act, 1996. It is stated that the Service Commission is bound to take into consideration the statutory provisions and as such having sent the other candidates for medical examination, he was not sent on the ground that on verification of the Driving License as on the date of notification dated 30-12-2008 he was not having the endorsement of Heavy Vehicle Driving License. It is stated that the selection process was initiated online from 13-4-2009 to 30-4-2009, and therefore, unless the Tribunal directs the respondents to send him for the Medical Examination for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, he will suffer serious irreparable loss.

(2.) A counter was filed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Principal Secretary, TR & B Department stating that the Public Service Commission issued notification No.45/2008 on 30-12-2008 for recruitment of 217 vacancies of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors in the A.P. Transport Subordinate Service in Transport Division. The post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector is governed under the special Rules issued for the A.P. Transport Subordinate Service vide G.O.Ms.No.71, Transport, Roads & Buildings (Ser-IV) Department, dated 19-2-2009. As per annexure appended to the Special Rules, under Rule 6, to hold the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, one must possess degree in Mechanical Engineering or Automobile Engineering or must possess Diploma in Automobile Engineering and must hold Motor Driving License and should have experience in driving motor vehicle for a period of not less than 3 years and possess Heavy Vehicle Endorsement, provided where persons with 3 years experience in driving motor vehicles are not available, the persons with two years experience in driving motor vehicles may be appointed. It is stated that the A.P. Public Service Commission has furnished a list of candidates along with the details of the driving licenses to the department requesting to verify the eligibility of the driving licenses to hold the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector in accordance with the Special Rules issued for the Transport Subordinate Service. Pursuant to the same, some of the driving licenses were verified with reference to records available and also the computer data available in the Central Survey of the department. The verification report in respect of the petitioner herein revealed that his driving license expired on 22-12-2008 and is not valid as on the date of notification dated 30-12-2008. He himself admitted that he has renewed the driving license on 23-1-2009 i.e., subsequent to the date of the notification. Hence it was informed to the Public Service Commission that the driving license was not valid and hence he is not eligible. He got the driving license on 8-6-1989 and the Heavy Transport Vehicle endorsement on 28-10-1991 and it expired on 22-12-2008. It is stated that under sub- rule (3)(a) of Rule 12 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules 1996, a candidate should possess the academic qualifications and experience including the practical experience prescribed, if any, for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector as on the date of notification for direct recruitment issued by the concerned recruiting agency. The candidate who has applied for the post of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector under notification No.45/ 2008 dated 30-12-2008 issued by the A.P. Public Service Commission must possess a valid driving license as on the date of notification on 30-12-2008, and thus, it is stated that O.A was without any merits and is liable to be dismissed.

(3.) THE very self-same contentions have been raised in these writ petitions contending that the Public Service Commission initially issued notification No.45/2008 dated 30-12-2008 publishing in news papers, employment news inviting applications for 217 posts of Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspectors. However, it is stated that notification made available in the internet on 13-4-2009 contains details with regard to the procedure of selection, method of applying, breakup of vacancies, communal roaster within each zone, Syllabus and scheme of examination in Paras V and VIII of Annexure I and II. The comparison of notification published on 30-12-2008 in daily news papers and the notification made available in the website on 13-4-2009, clearly and categorically shows that the notification dated 30-12-2008 as published is not as per the A.P. Public Service Commission Rules. That as per Rule-3 of the A.P. Public Service Commission Rules, the Commission shall announce the number of vacancies, invite applications, conditions of admissions to the examination, the subjects, scheme or syllabi of the examination etc., but in the notification dated 30-12-2008 as published, it is mentioned that a detailed notification with break up of vacancies, scale of pay and other instructions may be viewed on the website from 13-4-2009. Therefore, the notification, which was made available in the website on 13-4-2009 bears the date as 30-12-2008. However the State of A.P framed new Rules under Proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India for A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules in G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 19-2-2009 in supersession of the earlier rules after publishing the notification dated 30-12-2008 and in the detailed notification made available in the website from 13-4-2009 onwards, it is stated that the recruitment shall be made as per new A.P. Transport Subordinate Service Rules, and therefore, the date of notification shall be taken into account as 13-4-2009 but not 30-12-2008. In support of their contention, they have relied on a Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise v. New Tobacco Co (1) AIR 1998 SC 668 wherein the notification was not made available and that mere printing is not sufficient unless the printed material is made available to the general public. It is stated that the Tribunal has erroneously held that no prejudice would be caused by mentioning the Rules made in G.O.Ms. No.71 dated 19-2-2009 in the notification dated 13-4-2009 and that the tribunal also erroneously held that 13-4-2009 is only a proforma application and not a notification.