SRI. G v. SHIVAJI

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BI{EI}IIII:'F{I(A IIIRIT PE'TITION No. 78170F 20'[3 o RDER: isSU,,:C. On generatlng Petilioner's case is that he passed SSC in Khammam District and ITI in the trade of Electrician with 569/700 marks He belongs to BC-A community' Respondents issued Notlhcat-ion dated 05-01-2011 noti-$ing 1086 posts of Junior Plant Attenciant in various stations. Thereafter, supplementary notificaLici-i n'as 17 -lO-2OLt increasing the posts t'o l'I5:' inciutling a'il backlog vaca.ncies. PeLitioner appeared for selection wi'cir ilali Ticket No. 3()6O0220 and got 62'39 marks' Resporrdenlr; g'1-r:lc' '1e*iaring result-s, rrotified cut-off marks in respect of each g-'nc:ili ilsl 'ji'rL "'r ri'ith r ei'crence to the District' It is submii-ted tl'ir; :eti-ior'':- v''trs s.[ror,, r as belou' cut-off marks by considering ]rts ;andtc zr L r"' r ll-' ir. thrc generating stations which falls rvithin the ('istriclj ir i';r''::'ir petitir:'ner studied SSC and his case w-as not c: rrsrdr:r-:C lt;: ' 1": posli; iri c,ther generating stations by treating hiri' ar; I'l'-;r--l ':'al t.r"' applying A-P. Public Employment (Organization or l'ocal lracir-r arLd R:gulatrcn cf Direct Recruitment) Order' 1975 (her:irr aftlr r':i::.'cd irr ct-rr--olf r:riu hr; to as presidential orderJ though petitioner is ir. ori,. :r gen(lrrting stations' "vitf i;sued It was further streted t lat resl :'nde n -s Prcvisiorrz.l Serer:tion List of candidates ap'pointed t t r--spr:ct of pcsl: rrotijie c ilr .]ftlr{ K.T-P.S Palave.rrc::er aad i.:-T.P'.i. V li:ar,,,:. -..1-. - 2 marks of petitioner a:e 52'39 ' r"'hereas cut- off marks notjfred in BC.A Categor-v in KTPS are 76'Upon verification of seie<:tion list' he came to knorv th'at resp'lnCents have violated rules of sr:lection and reservation. Verification of selection list shou's tl:e fc'llowing irregularil:les'. (i) Candidates l:clot-rg to BC A' rvith merit marks are against BC'A' rosler vacancies only' Si.No. 59 rvith Rosttr Pc'rnt' 2O BC 'A'and 81'31 marks' l;elected i I I S! No 7l 75 7e b 87 9l I rl,,.r SI Nt It-' Iti-c SI, NO Ito'i 'l rill'r ?)nlt 3:iJ 3;:llC + +,.1)a j '-,j / ir-"n i i-rer,:a '," I (tc i.)ste - :'cint I ,l( ,, Marks

60.9! 80-8(sc) 80-71(SC)

80.6(OC)

80.s(oc)

80.31(SC)

77.71(BC'L) Marks

77.57-BCts APPonrrcd

77.O3-BCts'APPdnted Ivlalks

77.37 BC A' APPoinled V/hcrlas --- S! )l(. O. (1. vac€.I.,: --l - J I' I ies lltl:cl uo with othe:- communities with lesser marks Marks

76.16 SC A-PI)oiriec ) ,} t2?. t3l r60 880C 92(r 2loc 76 07 SC Appoi.lted

75.49 BCC'Appoiitcd

74.99 SC Appointed Whereas OC riacancies hlled up with other communities lvith lesser marks. It was further stated, as per note III of the notihcatiort as per G.O.Ms.No.98, dated l5-04-1986, "The vacancies if any iett- over or unfilied out of 50% of vacancies earmarked for Land Losers/displaced persons by virtue of non-availabiliff of canciiclarc; rvith prescribed qualilications for the post of JPA and as per- the selection procedure prescritred in the above G.O. shall be con.rerted as "General Vacancies" and shall be filled up ra,ith non-dispiar:etl persons/general candidates. Out of total notified vacancies, 5oo,'o vzrcarrcies were earmarked to be lilled up rvith [-and Lcs,irs. t.L . submrtred, after hnalization of recruitment, the \racailcy pc::.r c r. . furnished bv ;espondent-s under the Right to Information 4.c L:; r,:r follol's: Notifled Vacancles Vacancies filled up Cari', ::rr'.a:1:l: i.'TPS iO&M 170 160 i0 According to petilioner, the above would shou' Lhai thr:.c are toial I0 ve.cancies left unfilled. Thereiore, in vir',1 of the -,':rcar-c:;. existing left ur:hlled out of total vacancies notified, l'espDii.ierrts solrght Lr; han.e considered the candidates beloiT. the c.rt-L>l, nt r:il.., t I l i j 1 4 notifted. in propo;tion l'o the vacancles nort' remained vacant but respohderts have been acting contrary ar-id in arbitrary manner' stating thal- vacartcles left unhiled from the General F:ecruitment as rvell as land loosel category have been carried forward to ne>it General recruitment which itction is illegal, arbitrar5r unconslitutional' Petitioners marks are 62 39 therefore' iost seiection with 13 61 marks 10 existing vacancies and as per the vacancv position, there are for Scheduied Tribe remainecl unfilied which are earmarked candidates zrnd if respondents consider the candidates next in the merit list, pet-itioner ma get opportunity of sele<:tion and appointmenl, su-c', ac[ion is illegal and contrary to the notifrcation' Apart fro:n the e-bove, the Government issued amendment to tlte A'P' State and Slubo rc.l:-ratr: Rules, w hicl at'e a-so been follov'red by the respcndent corporaiicr:, r'ide G'O Ms'i\o' 674' dated 30-10-2008' u'hich specihcally l,rrescri: 'd :rs lollr;t'vs: ' SC,ST,Bac]"rt'aril::l.asses(Grottp.A|,(Group-B|,(Grc.up-C},(Grorrp.D) I n ai-l rccruitme rt qualifted <'andidates b€k'nging to t;re and as the case rlrr-v be (Grottlr-U) aird women at e nct availabte for appointmerLt to any or dl the vacancres 1656 r'e<l lbr them, a lirnited recruitment conhneC to caldidates beiortging r o th )nr srlrall l-e macle rrnmeriiattj1-" afrer the general recnritment to select and a1]p'>ir| qua.lilted candrdates frorn among the ptlrsonlr belonging to these ClnrmUnl les As suc:r, Lhe l)(:iit r ill sucll resen,'ecl vacancies" irer ;rPproached thts Collrt q'ilh relief afc relnelltioued 'iLre ce.:;e ol responcietrl-s i:r that AP GIINCO ui'de its

2. Notil-tc-:a lion dzrtccl ,)5-0 1-2O11 read rvith Supplemental N()tification I t t I , I I I I 5 dated, 17.10.2011 inviteci applications from the eiigible candidates for fiiling up ol 1755 JPA posts in various power Senerating stations located ai various places in the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh novr TSGENCO. In the said notification it was clearly mentioned about the breakup of posts, Generating Station-wise, number of posts earmarked for certain communities and also number of posts earmarked for women in Clause-2 of the said notification' It vyas submitted that the following qualifrcations are prescribed for the pcst of JPA viie Clause No.7 of notification are: M uslpossesssSLC/SSC/lo"CIasswffi lf l inEledriciar/Fitter/Machinbv wreman/v,tbhef/Turner/MedairqDiesel)/lnstruinentM$hanioDrawhtsrnan (Mechanical)i2 years vo$tona Course in Elea.ric{an tiade as ci 01.10.20i1 Note.'(i) ln addrtion to ihe ah)ve iTlTrades. the conkac{ hbourers wtlo worked tr U'icrk fig ln :re Poxer Gere€trng Stalrons of AP GENCO and possessing the lTl Trades na."iy"1l; orr19r,t..an (Civil). (iiiEleclronics Mechanic; (iii) Mechanic Molor(Vehicle); and {iv) l,to,rl;e- a.e alsienltled to arplt, to lh-' oost cf JPA as per the direclions of Hon'ble High Court cf A P in v1P.M P.No.1C722 Cl 1 rn W.P N0.873 !2A116!d24.1 .2011' (irl Th3 candidat,rre Df the cani;dates (i)not possessing Or the lTl Trades as ndicated in the Nolification as on Candidates shall summar,ly be releded the requisite qualification 0'1.10.201o(ii) Possessing state SSC/ ITI , I lt rvas also submi'rted that based on the following information iurnished b-v petrtioner in his on line A.pplication, he has been aliotted reierenc" ID.No.740634 ..\.-.. 6 .l Narne No F ather's ntu-r't, t2 Date of bir th Distr-ict Comrnunity Are You rvorlcttg 'l'ith APENCO Academic Quali hcation lechnical Qualihcation 4 5 6 7 S. Satyacarayaita \aisaiall 17- t t- 1975 l:hamam BC(A) No SSC l. T.T{Etectriclar l wasalsosubmittedthatasdetailedabove,petitionerlt'asCoverecirrl:2[tratiofor written test conductec on l8-i2-2011''Ihe totai marlis secure(l by p'etitioner It is as follows: si. No 2 3 4 Particulars l.T.I welghtage u:arks Year of passing rcarks Experience mark s Written test rlarrs Tota.l rnarks Marks

21.'.'c) 0 .i6.O

50.3S I ]tuassubr:r:t'r-edilrarpetitiorrcrde(.ia|ecKhamrr,ara,snative District in ris on irrre ltpplication ai:rd secut't'd 5C 39 marks in total alter attending th: ieriticn test- i{e belongs l-. BC(A) cl)mlrrunity' The last cut-off rnarlis ,cr EC(A) community consiC':re<l filr appearance to thc- tracle test z t {TPS /O&.M rv.:s 59. i'1 mirrks Ior t'lon-locai (open 7 category) and 54.84 marks for local category. Petitioner got only 5O.39 marks and could not found placernent for appearing to the trade test , conducted in the ratio of l:3 for the post of.IPA. It uras further submitled that petitioner was aggrieved by not permitting him to appear to the trade test for not having covered in the ratio of l:3 as per the procedure follorved, petitioner approached this Court and obtaineci orders for issuance of hali ticket for appearing to the trade test. Accordingly, he was allowed for the trade test conducted on i3-O4-2O13 and secured 12 marks. Based on the marks secured as per Clause 9(A) i.e., s1. No I 2 4 5 Particulars 1-T.I rveightage marks 'fear of passing marks E:"peiience mar)is Written test rna,-ks 'lrade test mierks Total marks Marks

24.39 10 Nil

16.0 t2

62.39 and found that he was not covered in the ratio of 1: 1 of the selecticn list. Petitioner declared Kharr.r:ram as his native district for the post cf JPA. 'l'he last cut-off marks at KTPS (O&M) for BC(A) communi.ty rvas

78.54 for non-local (open .:ategory) and 77.29 for local. Petitioncr neither selected under Open category nor under local quota, since h'- \. I I I 8 secured less marks than the last cut-off marks mentioned above lt is to submit that petitioner could not reach the cuL-off ma'rks' 'l'herefore' his name was not reflected in the selection list. only the narnes which are reflected in Lhe seiection list are considered foi: ihe irurpose of frlling up of various points in the Roaster chart' it was further submitted that petitioner secured only 62 '39 marks in total u'hich are less than the last cut-off marks notified under BC (A conrmunity at KTPS (O&M) i.e.78.54 for Non-local (open category) ar:d 7i"29 marks for iocal. The proceCure adopted for preparing the final seler:Lion list in the ratio of 1:1 as being foilou'ed in the Respondent Corporation as ordered by the Government in the matter o[ al1 direct recruitment rvhich is as detailed belol: -As per the instructions issued in the erstwhite A'PI'RIiNSCO ueml.No-Ctr't1e1/DS(P)i AS(P)/PO' 1/ 1/'r'53/93' Dltect- t4 o9 1999' the master list co*pt'tl'1g oi :r[ can:]:datei i-respe( live o{ categories aranged itt iht or-der cf merit T'r e r-tu:rrbt r'tf vaca-rcies earrnarked for Clpen competiticn shall be siet aPajt fron tte meiii list itsel-f in the order oi merrt Aiter selecting cpert comPetition candid.ates froln the master nleiit [ist, candidates co:nin11 under reservation categories wili be taken up Alt the seiectoc carldidates should be arranged in order o- merit Tlle in a reserved fitment against th! Iio"tet Poinls can be tione trv ta<ing-rp tlre list The r:arrilicLrte: lrom thl top candidates from such merit ord€r will be hlled against the "Op€n competition"(OCl Rcster ro'nt oil t-)e firstRosterPointforthatresen,edCategoq,u.hiche.rerCcnlesup first dull ensuring that fitment in the Ro-ster Point $c'uid be in line tith the merit lrt of the Selected candidates, Tris prrocr-,cure is being foilorved since then in all cascs of direr;' tr'c-uitrlerlt ln variJrs categories- The selecte<i cand.Lcates are cc\:ntrld agttinst the Roster Points. Hence' the selection process is dillerent tc ti1e process of counting against the Roster Points"' ",tagory I It was further submittecl that it is a [ac.. I hat as pcr the issued iu G.O.Ms.No.98, dat-eci- I:;-04.- 195t', rra'c:rn';jr:s if ar-rl' c.,r uniiiled oul of 5O9'o of vacancies arc- rlr tri<ctl lor land orders le ftcve r 9 ,: losers/displaced persons by virtue of non availabilit5r ol candidates rvith prescribed qualifications for the post of JPA and as per the selection procedure prescribed in rhe above GO. shall be converted as general vacantcies and shall be filled up with non-displaced persons/general caldidates. This procedure has been foliowed totally in the current recruitment taken place in the Respondent Cooperation. Ail such left over vacancies have been hlled up u,ith the general candidates wherever it is found necessary. Hence, the contention of petitioner that they rr€re not hlled up rvith the general candidates is not correct. However, it is to submit that rro quota u,as identified for landlosers at O&M/KTPS. It is a fact that 17O vacancies were identifred for O&M/KJ'PS and out of u.hich- 16O have been fi1led up with suitable and eligible candidates by direct recruitment duly following the Rule of reserwation and also ke eping in view the procedure in preparation c,i roster s! st i.rrr as explained supra. TLre remaining 10 vacancies pertzrin purely to the rvomen reseivation q/hich cannot be hlled up .*'ith other candidates. 'I'h(lse vacancies al.e required to be carried fcru,arded for [u lurc recruitment. as per the procedure being follov.'ed in all the direct recruitments. They are required to be lilled up rvirh the suitable a-od eligibie \.omen candidates only as and r;hen next recruitnent tallen place. It was also submitted rhat petitioner s contenticn is that there are left over unfilled vaca.ncies a r {t)8;M) / iiTPS are not being filled up and carry ior,varding the same tc thc nexr recruitrnent- h: this I I 10 connection, it is pertinent to mention that Respondent Corlloratlon rs fcltou,ing tfre Gor,ernrrrent orders issued from time to tir:e in the matter of clirect recruitment and as per the orclers issr-red in G.O.IvIs.No.81, G.A (Ser.A) Department dated 22'2'7997 v'hicl.r were zrdol.r-'ed by APSEB uide BP(P&G-Per)Ms' No' 1O0, dated 28'07'1997' the list of the candidates approved/ selected shall be equal to the numbei- of vacancies only including those for reserverl cor:rmunities/ cartegories notified. The fall out vacancies, if any due to relir quistrment arrdnon_joining,etceteraoftheselectedcandidatesslrilllbe.notiliedin tl'il next recruitment as there is no 'rv-aitinS list procecir:Lre in the respcndent Corporatioh. It is also a fact that as per th': Re;;ulations in fbrce, a. limited recruitment is to be taken place for filling iu) the b:rchiog vacancie s. The respondent Corporatior' i e', TSC'f \C'i) ltas br:r:n lbrmed with effect from 02.06-2014. consequent to bif'-rrcaLtion o1 tl-:' for::tcr State of Andhra Pradesh into Teiangana Sta r: a-r ll A'P' ij..,lc. l\s pe1. fJire work requirements, the respc;rdert c rr:o'etir'rr nta\ ;io iti tbr iiiling up of vacancies at aoprcpriatr: tin-e [{ence' the ron!intioa ol pel-itioner is not correct The entlre rccn- i:meL:r- iLi : been tz-,<en place as pel'the procedure notihed and duly ket:;:'ing 'r v:e''v the i)!',-.crs issued by the then Governrnent of A'P' as zrdollteci ir''' the ':r,i-,r-hilr., APGENCO in the matter of clirt:,:i recruitrnerlt ar:ci ::sic lCllc,';.,rng t.he spirit of presidentiai order onll'. llcrv, thc cntiie lccruiin-rent to the post of JPA is over and approval u'as als--l i'.< cordeo I Y tc ir: i{r:arls of power generating staticns oi APCEI{OO r. ir:le ]'iemc. t, 11 dated 03.1O.2013 for appointing 15O5 candidates i'e' I2O0 general candidates and 3O5 land losers in various power generatin$ stations' The S tation Heads concerned also issued appointment orders as per the approval accorded in the Memo dated' 03'1O'2013' Petitioner had secured oriy 62.39 marks and the last cut-off r-narks of a selected candidate under BC(A) community was 77 29 for Local ard 78-54 for Non-local (open category). The entire recmitmeirt has been taken place in the Respondent Corporation duly following the rule of resen'ation as prescribed by the Government in the matter of di:-ecI recruitrnent ouly Any fallout and no deviations took place in the said recruitment It vgas lastly vacancies will be frlled up in the next recruitmellt only' submitted that left over/un-filied vacancies if any dur: to vaflous redsons i.e., due to relinquishment cr non joining etc' of the selected candidates shall invariably be notified in the ne'ti recruitment as per theordersissuedinG.o.Ms.No.Sl(iA/Ser'ADepi,rlated22"02.1997 as adopted by the erstwhile APSEB in B.PIP&C} ['rrlMs'No' ] 0O' dated 28.07.1gg7 which are being :ollorvecl in AP (}ENCO [Nou' TS GDNCO]' As per the said orders, in a recruitment year' agzrinst the l'umber of notifred vacancies, selection shall be made only to lhe equal number of posts notitied and there shalt be reo WAiTING LIST' in otl-rer rvords' in a recruitment year, after selection of the candidate:l affl after issue of fails io jorn d'ri1,' ri'irhin the appointment orders, if the candidate be notihe,:i again in ihe next stipulated period, that vacancy shall recruitment year and the s1'stems of preparing "raiting lrst has been I t I t2 disperrsed with. These orders a-re sti1l in force and bein6i foliowed in the successor entities oI APSEB. Therefore, the fallout vacaucies if any due tc rerinquistLment or non-joining etc., of the selected can<lidates are i '\l \ being notified in thc next recruitment only. t in the additional counter afhdavit, it is mainly contended

3. that \Vrit Petition is liable to be dismissed since petitioner except making bald allegation that rule of resen ation is not follorved strictly i.c. :Lrrito;ious reserved category candidates rvere selet:ied iI1 the pos-is oi iesened category instead of considering them for Otl' porits. none of tht ::anclicates so allegedly selected were arrayed as F ztrties to thc w'rit p,:ti,ir;n. Hence it rvas contended that clocl< canrlot be set back lor qrirrrting th.- relief. Further, it was also contended [hat [)urslrant I'o rl.: :lilcctiols in SLP (C) No.156a9 cf 2OLT dated O4 O1'.2O';'7 P,:r nri,;sion v,,as ilccorded to frlt up all the unhlled vacancie:; r'i[Ltout li -i r'rl r,:c:rt-' itm.:n'- can be made, as such none of the relie:i; :-'o'.,ghLl in ll , \,I,r: i. l)et-itiot-t can be granted. It was also contendei thill pur:suan[ t<. . t:.: irt.-i:ri r,r direcdon dated 09.04.2O13 in Writ Pcti:i.on No. 1(1656 ol -i, ::-rctrLioner u'as also permitted to appeal in Tradr: Test. Pe t itioner .),, i is ii r',a.iv: or Khammam District and belongs to BC-A com:nttnirv-. [1e ri\': rtr r il : n .-qgr.rgate of 62.39 marks. The Ivlarks secured b;r tiri: lzrsi :;r:L'.l.:,r'rj r:aniidate :rom BC-A in non local calegory.r is, 78.;i4 anci that ir ;c.,: r,'I :'r t,:'[. or\,' ts 77.29. Thus pelitioner is not fal1ing u.illr:n the zotre :r.i r ',:' ;'r:' :-.rt icn 1c,:' appointment to the pr;st ol'JPA. asi 1c lioct-r.r:--d lc:is IJ marks than the cut-off marks in the respective category and has not come for final selection. As such sought for dismissal of lh" s'rit petition.

4. Petitioner Iiled reply to the additional afhdavlt rei[eraling the contentions raised in the writ petition and no plaursible rezrson is forthcoming from the petitioner regarding the specihc contentions raised in the additional counter allidavit ltled by the respondents hereir. E Head Sri G. V. Shivaji, learned counsei for peti:itrner and IvIs. V. Uma Devi, learned Standing Counsel for TRA.\SCO arnd GENCO. Perusal of the materiaL placed on rer:or'l u'c'-til inCicat:

6. that respondent-corporation uide Notification dated 115.31,2011 notified 1086 posts of Junior Plant Attendants in vario;s; leneratir:E stations. Thereafter, supplementary notil-tcation u'as issued on

17.lO.2OlI increasing the posts to that of 1755 vacancir:s iircluding all backlog vacancies. Petitioner declared Khar:',tna m .t: :Li ; na '-r-t District for the post of JPA. The last cut-off marks ai KT['S (Ct&N{} lor BC (A) communit5r was 78.54 marks for non-ioca1 {open i:ai:gory) and

77.29 mlarks for local. Petitioner r,r,.as neither selected ur.ir:r' ()per-r category nor under local quota, since he secured iess marks li:arn the last cut-off marks mentioned above. It is to su-bmit thr-rt p,iiit oner could not reach the cut-cff rnarks. Therelbre, his na-me i-': tic'- -crfltr':te d I I I i l I I I 1 i .,1 l4 irr the selection list. Only the names which ' are re:flectr:d in the selection list are considered for the purpose of filling up of various points in the Roaster chart' It was further submitted that petitioner secureC only 62 39 marks in total which are less than the last cut-off mark noti{ied uncler BC (A) community at KTPS (O&Vi) i'e 78'54 for Non-iocai (open category\ arLd' 77 '29 marks for local' lt is -he case oi responrlents that petitioner except making bald allegation thal rule of re servation : s not folloq'ed strictly i'e', meritorious reservfld category l:lr3ririlai<':; rvere seiected in the posts of reserved catogory instead oi- i:onsirienng them ior OC posts, none of the candidates s'o allegedl-v :;eIer',cri were arral'ed as parties to writ petition' Hel-rce it w-as :on l r-,.r'1€'l :irat ttrr: clock cannot be set back for grantinS; the reliel' Iir,r:irt:r. .t i\,as also contended that pursuant to the directions in sLP it'r it,, :i-4!' ctf 2(11.7 aaLed 04 'O7 '2017 permission was accorder[ to Frl] u:, irl[ 1a1: trr frlled -'llcarrcies without carrying forward tl'rez'; uide ][emc :lirr{ -- 1.:i (l:i 2018- Hence , no limited recruitmeni can be m:ide' as :;tlt:1. tit it.l :;,.the re :ie[s sought in the Writ Petition can be grante.l. It is n: ',r' appropriate to discuss the judgments relevant to ll,: :r lbit::t- issut '-n Rojeeo Tiuorri vs' State of Rqiastha'nr' the Division []:.,r:'a ,rl Rajasthan High Court held as under: l . r- r cm t.lrr: de 1 .c' ':o; .i) MereLv albr.e quoted decisions following pincipit:s tnal' be Decause the name of candidates were inclttdec rn the ,t,-,_,1i ..iOt) .)rlin: ,Raj 165 I I 15 pancl indicating their provisional selection, they did not acqulre any indefeasible right for appointment (ii) The State' however' cannot qlrietly and without good and valid reasons nullify t]le whole exercise and tell the candidates when they complain that they have no lega'I right to appointment.(ili) The decision not to fiU up the vacancies' has to be taken Bonafide and just Pass the test of reasonableness so as not to fail on the touchstone of Article 14 of the constitution. (iv) The state has to act tairly and the whole exercise cannot be reduced to a farce. (\'-) The state cannot ignore the select panel or decline to mal<e the appointment on its whirrs'' In R-S.-UittaI as' union of Indla2 ' the Division Bencl'r of the Hon'b1e Supreme Court held as under: "lO.It is no doubt correct that a person on the select panel has no vested right to be appointed to tfre post for which he has been selected' He has a right to be considered for apPointment' But at the same time' the appojnting authority cannot ignore the select panel or decline to make the apoointrr'ent on its-whims. VJhen a p€rson has been selected by the Selection Board and thett: is a vacancy u,hich can be offered to him, keeping in vierv his merit p'rsition' theD, ordinarily, there is no justifrcation to ignore him for appointrnent 'Iirete has to b€ a justiftable reason to decline to appoint a persor' w,ho is c:l 'i-'r' -i( '(:- panei- ln the present batch case, there has been a r'ere inaction on the pait o{ the Government. No reason whatsoe\,er, not to tajk of a justifiab]e reason, \('aS given as to why tlrc appointments were not offered to thc ce':rliC'r:( li cxpeditiously and in accordance with lau" The appointnr'rt JI-Io u I:l h;r" : ['lt'r: offered to Mr Murgad wittrin a reasonable time of availabrtil] of the "'acii":" art(1 ther.?after to the next candidate' The Central Governmei:t s approach 'r- thrs case was rrvholly unj ustifred"' ln Munia P-|oluee't os' St]a/te of 'J'elantgand3 ' the HoLr ble Apex Court while interpreting Clauses 8 and 9 of G'O Ms No'8 i ' carcd 22.02 IggT helcl that G'O'Ms' lvould come i:rto cperation onl'i ?ii1lr zrppointment letters were issued and' therefcre' il:r pers..rn' u':11 is 'rt ' (19)5lSriPP (2) SCC 230 '(tot; '" scc ?97 I I 16 number cne pJsitl()n, goes to one of the corporations and is) given the I appointment letter, he may not go to other three Corporations for verificaticn r..f the ,;r:rt;ll:cate, does not mean that the .irrst post in all "-. i"i the corporatrons sLould now lie vacant. in [.rnicn of India us. Uzair Imranf , tJrr: Ho:r'ble Apex Court held that if a candidate is not rejected at the threshold and the candidate is aliou'ed to participate in the selection process and ultimatel-r, h.s narro hg.rres in the merit list, though such candidate has no inciefeasible right to claim appointment, he does have a limited right of being ac:col,Ced falr and non-discriminatory treatment. Given the stages ol- lhe p:r>cess that the candiclate has successfully crossed, he may no t have ..: vested right of appointrnent, but a reasonable expectati()ll :rf L.eir rl appoint-ed having regard to his position in the rrerit list cr;ulcl zr r .:. ,n Dirresh Chandra Pandeg us, Iligh Court o'f Madhga Pradesh!', t[',: t,ir' .io.r ['l€ nr-:h of the Hon'ble Supreme CotLrt held as under: l-.'r. "ne ias ree n rse ri it r <.t de:rci.rc r 1--,cr: the tr, lror-islons i1],rrLg ,r it acnicr,:- :rn'-: t:le o l)- :l -Sa r_r:r'- 0t'l , - t,isl i ',r. cri :i:,i r ' ;'rall L r leEt:sl:-i:rr e arrl it is r:,rtrrls have taken a view that where the expression "shall" ir no nccessaril_v raean that it is mandatory. It rr,"ill a-1u a1's s o[ .r givc-- case, the conjunctive reading of tle relevant r trther provisions of the Rules, tJre purpose sought to be :r:t bc hind implenentation of such a provision. 'lhis Courl i)ir,,rrc [{-1009) 7 SCC 65.3] , took the vie\,/ that where thc :cerrl as slrali" rvould depend upon the intention of thc rt to [)e tal(en rhat once the word "may" is usecl, it per se ' 2.-2:l 'st t(l (-)r r ire lt( ,iro.,4 I S C,: .C[ Ll;;i l7 would be directory. In other words, it is not merely the use of a particular expression that would render a provision directory or mandatory. It would have to be interpreted in the light of the settled principles, and while ensur.ing tha{ intent of the Rule is not frustrated" In Manoj Manu a. (Jnion of Indiae , the Division Bench of the Hon'b1e Supreme Court held as under: "9. It can be clearly inferred from tlre reading of the aforesaid that it is not the case where any of thes€ persons initially joined as Section Oflicer and thereafter resigned/ left/promoted, etc. thereby creating ttre vacancies again. Had that been the situation viz. alter the vacancy had been filled up, and caused again because of some subsequent event, position woujd have been dift-erent. In that eventuality UPSC would be right in not forwarding thr names from the list as there is culmination of the process with the exhaustion of thc noti{led vacancies and vacancies arising thereafter have to be filled up by fiesh cxamination. [{owever, in the instant case, out of 184 persons recorlmended. six persons did not join at all. In these ctcumstances when the candidates in reserved list on the basis of examination already treld, were availabte a-nrl Dopl' hari approached UPSC "within a reasonable time" to send the names, rve Co rrol r;ee anl.' reason or justification on the part of UPSC not to send ttre na.nes.

8. It is thus manifest that a person whose name is includecl in ttre seiection list, does not acquire any right to be ap:por:iLed. Ttrc Govcrnment rnay decide not to filI up all the vacancies for i,alid reasons. Such a decision on the part of the Government shculci l]ot be rrlbil-rirry' .)r utreasonable but must be based on souncl, rariolal arrd conscious application of mind. Once it is found that decision of the Goverqrnent is based on some valid reason, Couit would not issue ernv mandamus to the Government to fitl up the vacancies_ '' (2O't ]t '2 !;CC r 7l I I I I i I l i .{ 18

9. In Dirresfu Kumar Rashgcrp tt' South East Cemtrat RailwagT,the Hoil'ble Supreme Court held as under: '6. ...Trcse 'r'/,:to are successful and deciared to be passed have a reasonable expectaL:ron that they will be appointed No doubt' as pointed out above, this is not a vcsted right. However, the State must give some jttstifrable' non-arbitrary reason for nor hlling up the post' When the emplo;rer is the State it is bound to act ac.ordinq to lifticle f i of the Constitution' It ()annot rvithout any rhyrne oi reascn decide not to irll up the post' It must give some plausible reason for not filting uP the posts The courts would normally n'lt qu€ stion the justification but the justilication must be reasonable and should not be an arbitrary, capricir,u s or rvhjrnsical exercise of discretion vested in the State" "

10. In Shankarsan Do.sh tlnion of Inclila8, the Constitution Berrch of []re Hon'bie Supreme Court held as urlder: "7. It is rr"t coriect lo say that if a number of vacant:ies are notifred for appointment a.r'.d ad:qttaLe nu;nber of candidates are founcl fit' the successfui candi'Iat r.r act:ui-e an irrrlefeasible ri8ht to be appointed which canrlot be legitinat::'. c,:r-it d r- rclirtaril,' lhe notihcation merely amorlnts to an invitation to qualihe, canr:idares to appl-v [or recruitrr.ent and oIr theil selection they do not acquire :r:rl risltt tc the posi. Untess the relevant recruitment rules so i;rdicate, the ll':i1-( is I .,jo- n I legal dutv to fill up al.t or any of the 'racancies' Ho*r'ever, it does Ir rl ne .'r tL itt tl1'l :itrlt€ has the licence t>f acting in an arbitrary rnanner 1 [ c det:r;icn liot io fili L.p the vacancies has t'] be taken bona fide for appropriate .:asoris Anrl i[ tire vacancies or any of them are frlled up' the State is boun<l 'c resoect the comparative merit of the candidates' as reflecteC at t:]e i-('r:lr: r:mcr t t3!i a.ild no rlis':ritnination cal be Permitted' This correct r.csition has retn coasistentil iollorved by this Court, ald we do not .rotc in .e dcciskrns i1 State of Haryana v. Subash hnd any discordarr l-)14 3 l:iCC 220.1n paragraph-8, relia'nce *ras place Chancier Mal-r';;llr a S;Lr:)rr.h (-'hanle,. ldarvrzrha l(197 +l 3 SCC 221), wherein on Sta',,e o l --iar--v a n, r his b.'rckgrirun,l iL a'zis oltserved that it is, of coarse, open it v/as hei.l t;rat [o '1tegl;-'isccr.tz 119.t 1 1 :, l, t:r:r I ; 3 I I l I I I t i I t -ri:.. r.:.' t9 to the government not to fill uP all the vacarcies for a valid reason, but the se'lecticn cannot be arbitrarily restricted to a few candidated notwithstanding t}re number of vacarcies and the availability of qualifred candidates; and, there must be a conscious apPtication of mind by the government a-r-rd the High Court before the number of persons selected for aPpointment is restricted'"

11. In K. ,Iagamohan as. State of Keralae, the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: "5. tt is settled legal position that merely because a candidate is selected and kept in the waiting list, he does not acquire ajly absolute right to appoi.ntment- It is .rpen tc the Government to make the appointmeni or not' Even if there is any vacancy, it is not incumbent upon tJle Government to hll up the same. But the appointing authority must give reasonable explanation for non-appointmcnt. Equally, rhe Public Sen'ice Commission/recruitment agency shalt prepare a waiting lis: only to the extent of anticipated vacancies ln view o[ the abore settled legal position, no e]Tor is found in ttre judgment of the High CourI warrantinB interference."

12. ln Punjab sEB (supra), it was held that 'It is settled iav; that mere inclusion oi rrame of a candidate in the select list does rrot confer or. such caildid ate arry vested right to get an order of appoirltrnejlt. 'lhis posiricn is made clea-r in para 7 of the Constitr:tion Bench judgmcnt of this Court in Srrcankarsan Dc,sh u' Union of fndia (st-t1.:ra) {n Kutvinder Pal Singh as. gta,te ol Punjab lCitll' 13. Appeat No.5035 - 5036 of 2016, the Divi.sion Bench at paragraph i7 held that 'Meleiy [rccause s;ome persons have been granted beneirt illegaiiy or by mistake, it does not confer right upon the appellants to clair:r equality'. ' 1to.,r;; 5 scc 1 zo 20 Fron the catena ol j':dgi.flents referred to, t. is t:lear ttrat

74. candidate, who participated in the selecdon process, cannot claim an absolute right tc appointmtnt as vested right even i[ soroe of the vacancies remained unhlled, hovrever, reasonable e:<pectations of being appointed having regard to his position in the merit l'ist would arise. At the sanre time, the Governmeni cannot igno;re se'lect panel or decline to make appointments on its whims and there rihall be a justifred reason for non-filling of unhlled vacan':ies' Further, Government cannot act in arbitrary manner and the clecisjon not to Iill up the unfille d vacanr:ies has lo be taken bona ftdelg fot appropriate reasons. It is an admitteC fact thal petitioaer except m aking bald 15. allegation that r-r-ile <:i rcserv: L:ort is; rsr f9ll611r6:d strictly i'e' meritorious ieservcd 3a',cgori' c:l]diC;lt3:l rvere sele:ted in tre posts ol resened category instea.d oi ct>nsidt"itrg thcn.r for OC posl-s, none of the candidates so allegcdi3' seiet're ,j r.r.:re arl ayecl as partles to Writ Petition. Hence, i:, apFears reasotla:ole lha- 'he clocl: cannot be set back for granting i.he relie'' [r rrllrer', as per the d:rections of the Hon'bie Apex Cor..r't ir-. SLP [C, I'lo 116':9 o- 2017'da1-ed A4'O7'2017, permission s'as accordcd tc till - p all ..he ur:hlled vacanc..es rvithout carrying forvrarcl :--er:n-. r;rle li[':no, ,1atcL1 O3.O3-2O1i]' Furt]rer aithough petitio:te; '.r::s aifo -ded op1:orl.ttnitl' to appezr. for trade test pllrsua+1r to interir I dir.l,:lio r cla .:ri 09.1,1.1.21r3, oi thir; Collrt in Writi {IK1- 2l Petition No.10656 of 2013, petitioner could nct secure required marks' He is a native ol Khammam District and belongs to BC-A community. He secured an aggregate of 62.39 marks ' The Marks secured by the last selected candidate from BC-A in non 1ocal category is 78.54 and that in the locai category is 77.29. Thus the petitioner is not falling within the :,axte of consideration for appointment to the post of JPA' as he secured less marks than the cut-off marks in the respective category and has rrot come for hnai selection' It is sett'led principle of law that a candidate' who 16. participated in the selection process, cannot claim an absolute right to appointment even if sonre of the vacancies remained unfilled' however, reasonaL,le exsectations oI being appointed having regard to his position in the r,erit list would arise' In ttre instant case' petitioner was nor evea placed in the merit list since he could not secure the required marks as stipulated as petitioner cannot have an1- indefeasible vcsr-ecl right in [he selection process. Further regarding the contentior: of unirlled vacancies pllrsuant to the directions in SLP {C) No.15649 ct 2Cl7 dated 04'07'2O17 permission was accorded to fill up all the unf-illed vacancies without carrying forward tlrern uide Ilemo ria,te'l 3.3.20 18. I{ence, the Wrir Petition is devoid of rnerits and the reiief so -rgtrt is liabte to be rejected' 17 . Accorciingll , rhe Writ Petitiore is dismissed' No costs' I I t I I 22 1Q Consequently, Miscellareous Applications, if any shall stand ciosecl. //TRUE COPY// SD/. ASS M/\N ALIBAIG REGISTRAR t ECTION OFFICER To

1. One CC to SRl. G. V. SHIVAJI, Advocate IOP-U^C] i. il; 66 i" r',ri. v. uun oeM (sc FoR TRANSCo) [oPUCl 3. Two CD CoPies BM GJP 1/ I I 4 * '/t,€ .{. HIGH COURT ' DATED:2810512025 ,a:-::=- ,/. 1, .,",, " tt - :' 1' ?, i,, 2 0 sEP 2U5 .- il /, !: 7 c) ORDER WP.No.7817 of 2015 ... * ilr. i: i i:-'l DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOIJT COSTS 6 /...s. f 3