← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/23078/2015dismissed no costs

Smt.Kaila Dhana Lakshmi D/O. Pandu Ranga Rao v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

2015-11-16Ramesh Ranganathan,M.Satyanarayana Murthy2 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN And THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION No.23078 of 2015 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice Ramesh Ranganathan) The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner as Junior Assistant in the Krishna District Unit of Andhra Pradesh Judicial Ministerial Services; and to post her as a Junior Assistant in any existing vacancies. Pursuant to a notification issued on 08.08.2013, whereby five posts of Junior Assistants were reserved in favour of the Scheduled Castes and three posts were reserved in favour of Scheduled Caste women, the petitioner appeared for the written examination and, on being found successful, was called for an interview. Under the belief that she was the third best candidate, both in the Scheduled Caste and the Scheduled Caste (women) category, despite which she was not appointed, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court.

A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the High Court wherein it is stated that, among the Scheduled Caste category, candidates who had secured 75 marks and above were only considered in the final merit list; in respect of candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste (women), only those candidates who had secured 68 marks and above were considered in the final merit list; the petitioner herein secured only 64 marks in total i.e. 51 marks in the written examination and 13 marks in the oral interview; and, as such, she was not considered for appointment by the High Court.

As all the three candidates, belonging to the Scheduled Caste (women) category, who were appointed as Junior Assistants, secured 68 marks and above, whereas the petitioner secured only 64 marks in total, the petitioner's claim for being appointed as a Junior Assistant, under the Scheduled Caste (women) category, does not merit acceptance. The action of the respondents, in not appointing the petitioner as a Junior Assistant since candidates more meritorious than her in the Scheduled Caste (women) category were alone appointed as Junior Assistants, does not suffer from any illegality. The Writ Petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J __________________________________ M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J 16th November, 2015.

Tsy