STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. SAMIULLA SHAREEF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh represented by its Secretary, Education Department and three others, questioning the order dated 4th October 2010, passed by the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, allowing O.A. No. 10647 of 2008 filed by respondents 1 and 2 herein. In the aforesaid O.A., respondents 1 and 2 herein have questioned the order dated 30.10.2008, passed by petitioner No. 4 herein, in Proceedings Rc. No. 9874/B4/(B7)/2004-2008, rejecting the claim of applicants for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in Medak District.

(2.) Respondents 1 and 2/applicants, have applied for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in response to the notification issued by the District Selection Committee, in the year 2001. Both of them have appeared for the written test and the 1st respondent herein has secured 62.80 marks and the 2nd respondent has secured 62.50 marks under 'OC' category. The results were declared in 2002 and selections were made in the year 2003. In the said notification, 265 posts of Secondary Grade Teacher were notified and filled. When a complaint was made against 16 candidates out of the 265 selected candidates alleging that the B.Ed., certificates produced by them were bogus, after conducting inquiry, the services of said 16 candidates were terminated by order dated 12.03.2004. Respondents 1 and 2 herein have earlier approached the Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 4154 of 2004, seeking directions to consider their case for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in the 16 vacancies which arose on account of termination of services of the persons appointed earlier. The said O.A. was disposed of, directing the petitioners herein to consider the cases of applicants and pass appropriate orders. Against such orders, petitioners have earlier approached this Court by filing W.P. No. 20933 of 2005 and the same was dismissed. In view of the directions issued by the Tribunal to consider the candidature of respondents 1 and 2 herein, petitioners have considered their cases and passed a detailed order, rejecting their claim by recording a finding that the vacancies, which arose on account of termination of services of the appointed candidates, cannot be termed as left-over vacancies. In the said proceedings, reference is made to Rule 13(1) of the Rules framed under G.O.Ms. No. 72, Education (Services-VI) Department, dated 03.07.2000, and as per the said Rule, the number of candidates selected shall not be more than the vacancies notified. It is stated that in the absence of any provision for maintaining waiting list, as per the orders of the Government in Memo No. 20796/Ser.VI.03/2002, dated 02.06.2003, resultant vacancies are to be notified in the next DSC, and further, as subsequent selections were also made in DSC-2003 and DSC-2006, respondents 1 and 2/applicants are not entitled for appointment.

(3.) Against the said order dated 30.10.2008, passed in Proceedings Rc. No. 9874/B4/(B7)/2004-2008, by the District Educational Officer, Medak, the present O.A. is filed in O.A. No. 10647 of 2008. The Tribunal, by referring to the directions issued in earlier O.A. No. 4154 of 2004, held that there were positive directions to appoint respondents 1 and 2 herein in the vacant posts which arose on account of the termination of services of 16 candidates, and as the petitioners have filled up only 249 posts, the remaining vacancies cannot be termed as resultant vacancies. With the said observations, allowed the above O.A. by setting aside the impugned order therein, with a further direction to consider the case of the applicants for appointment.