A. Ramarao, v. The A.P. State Road Transport Corporation,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.19988 of 2003 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents in not issuing appointment order as Shramik to writ petitioner in pursuance of the selection list dated 29.08.2000 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct respondents to issue appointment order forthwith.

2. It is the contention of petitioner that he passed SSC and completed ITI in Motor Mechanic Trade and undergone apprentice ship in A.P.S.R.T.C., Guntakal, from 14.06.1996 to 13.06.1997 and he is unemployed. He further contended that he applied for the post of Shramik in Mahaboobnagar region and in the selection list dated 29.08.2000 he was shown as selected for the post of Shramik and that he received a call letter on 07.09.2000 with a direction to produce all original certificates on 19.09.2000, accordingly he attended the office of respondent No.2 on 19.09.2000 and submitted all original certificates and that he was informed appointment letter would be sent in due course. He further contended that he also attended for the medical test on 10.10.2000, but however he did not receive any appointment order and in spite of several representations he did not get any response from respondents. He further contended that he came to know that many of the candidates figured in the list are selected and were given appointment orders as

Shramik and that action of respondents is discriminatory and arbitrary.

3. Heard arguments.

4. Advocate for petitioner submitted that the action of respondents in not giving appointment letter is illegal and arbitrary having shown the name of petitioner as a selected candidate in the list dated 29.08.2000.

5. On the other hand, advocate for respondents submitted that the entire selection list was cancelled and no appointment was given to any of the candidates and the contention of petitioner is not at all correct.

6. I have perused the material papers including the documents filed on behalf of petitioner.

The very contention that he was shown as a candidate selected in the list dated 29.08.2000 is contrary to the details mentioned in the call letter dated 07.09.2000. According to call letter dated 07.09.2000, he was only asked to appear before the Selection Committee with original certificates on 19.09.2000 to be considered for selection to the post of Shramik. Mere invitation to appear for interview before a Selection Committee does not confer any right of appointment and the contention of petitioner is not at all supported with any material. Advocate for respondent stated that entire selection was not taken up and cancelled and no candidate was given appointment. Petitioner has not produced any material to show that some of the candidates figured in list dated 29.08.2000

are given appointment orders therefore, the contention of writ petitioner with regard to discrimination cannot be accepted. Further when letter dated 07.09.2000 is only a call letter his contention that he has a right to get appointment cannot be sustained.

Further, mere selection list does not confer any right to claim any post. For these reasons, I am of the view that writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.

7. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.

8. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.

__________________ S. RAVI KUMAR, J 9th February 2016 mar