B.BHARATHAMMA Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In view of commonality of the issue involved in both the writ petitions, they are analogously heard and taken up for disposal by way of this Common Order. For reference and discussion, the facts in W.P.No.20036 of 2013 are taken.

(2.) The case of the petitioners, precisely, as per the writ affidavit, is that they are educationally qualified and eligible for appointment as Anganwadi workers, and Supervisors Grade-II; and the respondent- Government has conducted due selection process, and selected the petitioners for appointment. However, due to the ban imposed at the relevant time for appointments, the petitioners were appointed on contract basis through an agency, namely RK4CES Agency, on contract basis. The material papers filed with the writ petition would show that one Indiramma was appointed way back in the year 1985; and the petitioners have put in service ranging between 6 to 15 years as on the date of filing the writ petition in 2013. While so, the respondent- Government issued a Notification No.228/2013 dtd. 2/7/2013 for recruitment of Supervisors Grade-II, by providing 15% weightage marks to the contract employees/petitioners. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the Notification dtd. 2/7/2013 is illegal and arbitrary; in that the notification seeks the petitioners to appear for the selection process again, despite their selection against sanctioned posts and rendering services for over a decade.

(3.) Heard Mr.K.R. Prabhakar, learned counsel for the petitioners; and learned Government Pleader for the respondents. Perused the record.