Tasleem Begum v. The Telangana State Pubic Service Commission,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.5522 of 2019 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief :- " .....to issue order or direction more particularly one in the Writ of Mandamus declare the action of the Respondents in not considering the Petitioner for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher (Kannada Medium) pursuant to the Notification No 53/ 2017 under Orthopaedic Handicapped (0.H) as per her rank and merit as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the Petitioner to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher (Kannada Medium) Notification No.53 of 2017 under Orthopaedic Handicapped (0.H) as per her rank and merit as per the Revised detailed vacancy position of P.H.vacancies after inter changeability for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in School Education Department for notification No 53/ 2017 (Kannada Medium) by passing orders on the representation dt.5.3.2019 ....." .

Heard Mr.K.R.Srinivas, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri P.Balakishan Rao, learned Standing Counsel for 1st respondent. It has been contended by the petitioner that she is fully eligible and qualified to be appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher. The petitioner has responded to the said Notification and participated in the regular selection process. She is an orthopaedic handicapped person in Mahaboobnagar District. The respondents have notified one vacancy for visually handicapped woman. The respondents could not fill up visually handicapped woman post for want of candidates and after finalizing the selections, the respondents have issued revised vacancy position of physically handicapped candidates, which can be interchangeable and the respondents have made it clear that visually handicapped woman post can be interchangeable with that of hearing impaired persons and Orthopaedic handicapped persons. Immediately, the petitioner has submitted a detailed representation to the

respondents on 05.03.2009 requesting to consider her case for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in terms of the revised detailed vacancy position released by the 1st respondent. The petitioner further contends that the respondents have neither considered the representation submitted by the petitioner nor considered her case for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in terms of revised vacancy position released by the 1st respondent. Therefore, the counsel for petitioner contends that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in terms of revised vacancy position released by the 1st respondent.

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent has submitted that appropriate orders would be passed on the representation submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law and the case of the petitioner would be considered in terms of the revised vacancy position.

This Court, having considered the rival submissions, is of the considered view that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 05.03.2019 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J Date: 18-03-2019 Prv