MASANIPALLY ARJUN Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Initially, the above writ petition is filed by petitioners seeking direction to the respondents herein to follow the principles of horizontal reservation for special reservations i.e., persons with disabilities without embarking any roster points for them and consider the petitioners for appointment for the notification No.2/2024 dtd. 19/2/2024. The learned single Judge of this Court, after hearing the arguments of the petitioners and the respondents, was pleased to grant interim order vide order dtd. 12/6/2024 directing the respondents to follow the principle of horizontal reservation for special reservation i.e., persons with disabilities without embarking any roster points for them and consider the petitioners for appointment. It is further submitted that subsequent to the said interim order, the respondents have announced the result on 7/7/2025 and the respondent No.3 filed a vacate petition vide I.A.No.3 of 2024 on 22/7/2024 and the respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed vacate petition on 22/9/2024. The petitioners subsequently have filed an application for amendment of prayer vide I.A.No.5 of 2024 on 18/12/2024 challenging the Rules, more particularly, Rule 22 Sub-rule (2) (b) and (e) of the Telangana State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 (for short, Rules, 1996), which was brought into existence vide G.O.Ms.No.96 General Administration (SER.D) Department, dtd. 22/7/2019 and the petitioners sought to declare the same as unconstitutional and also violative of the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and also the judgments of this Hon'ble Court. In view of the same the said writ petition is listed before us.

(2.) It is further submitted by the writ petitioners that in the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission and others (2007) 8 SCC 785 and Public Service Commission, Uttaranchal v. Mamta Bisht 2010 (12) SCC 204, wherein the special reservations that of the women and other persons with disabilities i.e. special category persons, the rule of reservation shall be followed horizontally and not vertically and in the instant case, the Rule 22(2)(b) & (e) of the Rules, 1996 are violative of the above judgments and the respondents in deviation to the above two judgments, have followed the procedure under the said Rules, which are contrary to the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court stated supra, as such prayed to declare the said rules as unconstitutional. Besides this, the petitioners relied upon the orders of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.1165 and 1172 of 2024, wherein it is stated that the Division Bench has held, in case of women reservation, the horizontal reservation has to be followed and petitioners contended that the respondents cannot deviate from the orders of the Division Bench of this Court and implement Rule 22(2)(b)&(e) of the Rules, 1996.

(3.) Per Contra, The respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed counter-affidavit along with vacate stay application stating that petitioners herein have challenged the present Rules in G.O.Ms.No.96 dtd. 22/7/2019 on 18/12/2024 vide I.A.No.5 of 2024, by which date, both the preliminary and main examinations were concluded and the present writ petition is squarely covered by the orders passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.26038 of 2024 and batch dtd. 26/12/2024, which was also confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.2410 of 2025 passed on 3/2/2025 and contended that the Present Petitioners also stand in same footing that of the petitioners in the above case, where in the Hon'ble the Division Bench has categorically held that petitioners after lapse of several months cannot challenge the said rules and held that in the cases of this nature, day-to-day delay is very important and that the said writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed on that ground alone. It is further submitted by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 that similarly situated persons with that of the petitioners in notification No.2/2024 dtd. 19/2/2024, also challenged the said notification in a batch of writ petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.21239 and 22320 of 2024, filed on 2/8/2024 and 13/8/2024, respectively, and the challenge to the selection process in the previous round failed on the ground of delay and the said orders were confirmed by the Hon'ble Division bench of this court and also confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court.