Rayala Upender Rao, v. Rajiv Gandhi University Of Knowledge Technologies,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN
Present
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.39502 of 2015 Katakam Mahesh, S/o. K.R. Subramanyam, Aged 28 years, H.No.1-10-28/132, PL.No.175-B, Road No.4, Nagarjuna Nagar Colony, Kushaiguda, ECIL (PO), Hyderabad - 500 062.
WRIT PETITION No.39505 of 2015 B.V. Sudhakar Reddy, S/o. B.V. Krishna Reddy, Aged 30 years, B2-F4, Faculty Quarters, R.K. Valley Campus, Y.S.R. Kadapa District - 516 329.
WRIT PETITION No.39515 of 2015 Shekhar Sheelam, S/o. Krishnaiah, Aged 30 years, Room No.301, 2 BR Old Faculty Quarters, Basar Campus, Basar Village, Adilabad District - 504 107.
WRIT PETITION No.39525 of 2015 Daundkar Ramesh Kailas, S/o. Daundkar Kailas Yedhu, Aged 28 years, At Post. Shelpimpalgaon, Tal-Khed, Shelpimpalgaon, Pune, Maharashtra - 410 501.
WRIT PETITION No.39527 of 2015 B. Imran Shareef, S/o. S. Buddan Saheb, Aged 27 years, D.No.C1-T4, Faculty Quarter, Rajiv Gandhi University of Knowledge Technologies, R.K. Valley, Vempalley, Kadapa - 516 329.
WRIT PETITION No.39545 of 2015 Ch. Vasu, S/o. Ch. Sanyasi Rao, Aged 25 years, D.No.13-8-1/2, B.C. Road, Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam.
WRIT PETITION No.39640 of 2015
Rayala Upender Rao, S/o. Ayodhya, Aged 28 years, Marrigudem Village, Kothalingala Post, Khammam District - 507 182.
The Court made the following:
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.39502, 39505, 39515, 39525, 39527, 39545 & 39640 of 2015 COMMON ORDER:
Notification No.2 of 2013 was issued calling for applications for enlistment to various categories of posts in the respondent University including posts of Assistant Professors in several disciplines. The petitioners came out successfully in the selections conducted and, accordingly, by orders, dated 26.10.2013, they were issued appointment orders. These appointment orders were kept in abeyance by orders of the competent authority, dated 28.10.2013. The said abeyance orders were earlier challenged before this Court in W.P.No.6006 of 2014. This Court passed interim orders. However, during the pendency of the said writ petition, the Governing Council has taken a decision to cancel the entire selection in pursuant to the Advertisement No.2 of 2013.
The petitioners challenge the decision of the Governing Council cancelling the entire selection in
pursuant to the Advertisement No.2 of 2013.
2. In W.P.No.5107 of 2015 & batch, the decision of the Governing Council of the respondent University cancelling the entire selection is challenged. This Court, by judgment, dated 13.11.2015, allowed the writ petitions. This Court held as under: "20. Having gone through the contentions urged in the counter affidavit, I am of the view that the irregularities pointed out are not material and the selection process is in accordance with the notification issued for the said posts. As already said, absolutely there is no malpractice, manipulation or fraud in the process of selection. If that is so, the entire select list cannot be cancelled to the detriment of the meritorious candidates.
This is not a case wherein it is not possible to segregate the properly selected candidates from improperly selected candidates even by following the rule of reservation. On the pretext that some mistakes occurred in the process of selection, the entire selection process shall not be annulled. As pointed out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments referred supra, if the selection process is tainted with corrupt practices, manipulations and fraud, then only the entire selection can be cancelled. In the instant case, absolutely, even according to the respondents, there are no corrupt practices, manipulations or fraud played in the process of selection. Most of the petitioners are working as contract lecturers in the respondents-University.
If they are selected fairly in accordance with the norms indicated in the notification, they cannot be denied appointment on the grounds viz., rule of reservation has not been followed, no cut-off marks were prescribed, some ineligible candidates were given appointment etc. The counter affidavit does not mention about any specific irregularities candidate-wise. Apparently, it seems that the basis for cancellation of the select list is nothing but the Note issued by the then Deputy Chief Minister of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh and the fax message sent by the State Government. No specific irregularity has been pointed out by the Sub Committee appointed by the Governing Council of the respondentsUniversity.
selection or that they were not properly selected for their respective posts.
21. In view of what all stated herein above, the resolution of the Governing Council of the respondentsUniversity cancelling the entire selection process in pursuance of Advertisement No.2/2013 is declared as illegal and it is set aside. Consequently, the respondents are directed to examine the select list thoroughly, apply the rule of reservation and segregate the candidates who are improperly selected from the properly selected candidates and appoint the petitioners according to their merit and by applying the rule of reservation pursuant to their respective appointment orders. With the above directions, all the writ petitions are disposed of. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in these writ petitions shall stand closed. No costs."
3. When the matters are taken up, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader, learned Standing Counsel representing the respondent University have stated that the subject matters of the writ petitions are covered by the decision of this Court in W.P.No.5107 of 2015 and batch.
4. Having regard to the same and following the earlier decision of this Court, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. The cancellation of the entire selection process in pursuant to the Advertisement No.2 of 2013 is declared as illegal and it is set aside. Consequently, the respondents are directed to examine the select list thoroughly, apply the rule of reservation and segregate the candidates who are improperly selected from the properly selected candidates and appoint the petitioners according to their merit and by applying the rule of reservation pursuant to their respective appointment orders. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
_________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J Date: 7th December, 2015 KL HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.39502, 39505, 39515, 39525, 39527, 39545 & 39640 of 2015
Date: 7th December, 2015 KL