High Court for State of TelanganaWP/1881/2007dismissed no costs

M.B.V.A.Narasimha Rao v. The Chief General Manager, H.R.D., Eastern Power

2015-07-13Sanjay Kumar2 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.1881 of 2007

ORDER

The grievance of the petitioner in this case was that the respondent organisation was not considering his case for appointment to the post of Contract Junior Lineman. His specific complaint was that all the marks obtained by him, including the marks in Social Studies, were not being considered. By interim order dated 05.02.2007, this Court directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner along with others for appointment to the post of Contract Junior Lineman. In the counter affidavit filed in support of W.V.M.P.No.392 of 2012, the Superintending Engineer, APEPDCL, Operation Circle, Rajahmundry, stated that the entire process of selection was completed by February, 2007 and that the case of the petitioner was also considered pursuant to the interim order.

He further stated that the petitioner did not come within the zone of consideration even after taking into account the marks secured by him in Social Studies. He was stated to have secured only 539 marks out of 650 marks in the qualifying examination whereas the last candidate selected from BC-D category, to which the petitioner belongs, secured 549 marks out of 650 marks. The petitioner was stated to have been informed of the same vide letter No.CJLM/3677/07 dated 28.02.2007.

In the light of the aforesaid developments, the rejection of the petitioner's case pursuant to the interim order granted by this Court gave rise to a fresh cause of action. The issue as to his entitlement for appointment as a Contract Junior Lineman cannot

therefore be adjudicated in the present writ petition in the absence of a challenge to the subsequent rejection.

The Writ Petition is therefore dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies in accordance with law, if not already availed.

Pending miscellaneous petitions shall also stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

___________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 13th July, 2015 sj