P.Asha, v. The Executive Director (Hrd And Plg),
Date : 24.4.2017 Between :
P Asha D/o Raju R/o D No. 20-28-20Seethanagaram Visakapatnam and another Petitioner And The Executive Director (HRD & Plg) Transmission Corporation of AP Limited Vidyut soudha, Hyderabad Respondents The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER:
The Transmission Corporation of A.P. (for short APTRANSCO) has issued open advertisement dated 17.3.2017 calling for applications to recruit the posts of Assistant Engineer (Electrical) and Assistant Engineer (Civil). Applications are called from Engineering Graduates. The candidates were directed to submit applications online through website between 20.3.2017 to 12.4.2017. Along with the paper notification, the syllabus was also prescribed. The selection is based on the written examination and oral interview. Written examination is divided into two sections. Section-A deals with questions of core academic curriculum of respective disciplines and would carry 70 marks. Section-B contains questions of Analytical Aptitude carrying 30 marks. Petitioners challenge introduction of Analytical Aptitude test as included in Section -B, in this writ petition. 2.
Primary challenge on this introduction is on the ground that such system is introduced for the first time and when similar selections were conducted in the year 2012 this was not prescribed. The candidates were preparing for the method of selection based on selections made in the year 2012 and candidates are not given sufficient time to prepare themselves in the Analytical Aptitude and time granted is insufficient for them to prepare. Therefore, on that ground the selection process should be nullified.
3.
On instructions, learned standing counsel submitted that after bifurcation of the State into two states of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh and formation of separate Transmission Corporation for state of A.P., the entire system of recruitment is reviewed and present syllabus is prescribed to assess the suitability of the persons to be appointed in the Transmission Corporation of AP.
4.
It is seen from the advertisement that the advertisement was issued on 17.3.2017 and examination is scheduled to be held on 30.4.2017. In other words, more than 40 days of time is available to any candidate and it cannot be said that time available is not sufficient to prepare. Further more, it is for the employer to prescribe method of assessment of suitability for selection to any post, Court cannot interfere in such matters, unless it is alleged as malafide or such method of selection is arbitrary and discriminatory. The selection method prescribed is uniformly applied to all the candidates who participate in the selections. It is not the case of the petitioners that they are not aware of the same and others are informed in advance, therefore they are deprived of preparing themselves.
Having regard to the parameters of judicial review in this type of matters, I am not convinced to accept the contentions of the petitioners to grant the relief, more over, learned standing counsel submitted that all arrangements are already made for the examination scheduled to be held on 30.4.2017 and if at the last minute, stay of recruitment is granted, it would cause lot of hardship.
5.
Writ Petition merits no consideration. It is needless to observe that it is for the employer to take a decision on this issue with reference to conducting of the examination on the date already fixed or to postpone it to a later date. 6.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Having regard to the same, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, are closed. ______________ P NAVEEN RAO,J DATE: 24.4.2017 TVK
Date : 24.4.2017