Smt.S.N.Shilpa,D/O.Late Narasimhappa, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI W.P.No.12674 OF 2015

ORDER

This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents 4 and 5 in not providing the information about the selection proceedings and appointment orders of VRA post of Thumakunta Village, Hindupur Mandal, on the application made under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short 'the Act') as arbitrary, illegal and consequently to direct respondent No.4, who is the Chairman of the Selection Committee of VRO/VRA Recruitment-2012 to provide the selection proceedings and appointment orders of VRA.

Heard Sri D.Sudarshan Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

It is the case of the petitioner that pursuant to the notification issued by the 1st respondent, through the 2nd respondent in the year 2011 for the post of VRO/VRA of Thumakunta Village, Hindupur Mandal, she has applied and participated in the selection process. However, she was not selected. Subsequently, she came to know that a less meritorious candidate i.e., Mohan Babu was appointed.

When she enquired, the respondents have informed to the petitioner that her case was not considered as she has given a letter withdrawing her candidature from the process of selection. The said contention of the respondents is totally false and the petitioner has never given such letter withdrawing her candidature from the selection process. Hence, she submitted a representation on 17.2.2015 under the Act to furnish the particulars of the selection process, wherein the said Mohan Babu was appointed as VRO/VRA. But the respondents have not passed any orders on the said representation.

Learned Government Pleader has contended that once the petitioner has withdrawn her candidature from the selection process, the question of considering her case does not arise and hence, she is not entitled to the relief as sought for in the writ petition.

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that ends of justice would be met if the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.2.2015.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 17.2.2015 and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

________________________________ JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI 1st May, 2018 rkk