Cherukuri Sunitha v. '1 . The State of Telangana

Order

. Respondents The Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the action of tl-re respondents in not issuing appointment order to the petitioner to the post of Extension Olhcer (Supervisor) Gr.l as arbitrary and illegal.

2. Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Madiraju, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare Department for respondent No. 1 and Sri Y 2 P.S.Rajashekar, learned Standing Counsel forespondent No.2. With their consent, the Writ Petition is taken up 1tr disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up for hr', ring, the learned counsel for petitioner submits that the subject r atter of this writ petition is squarely covered by the order passerl by this Court in W.P.No.2553l ol 2024 and batch dated 12.12.2,) 25 and requested the Court to pass similar order in this writ petitr< n also. The said submission is not seriously disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. In view cif the above and following the order passed in W.P.No.2553 l of 2024 and batch dated 12.12.2(25 and in terms thereof, this writ petition is disposed of, directing r re respondents to re-consider the claim of the petitioner for appointrr ent to the post of Extension Officer (Supervisor) Grade-l in the -espondent No. 1 department in pursuance of Notihcation Nr .7112022 dated

27.8.2022, purely based on merit as was donr in the cases of appointment/promotions of similarly situated candidates, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a p<.: iod of eight (08) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this orc1t . I 3 Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

There shali be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPY// SD/.T. SRINIVASA REODY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER To SA 'l . The Principal Secretary to Government, Women Development and Child Welfare Department, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar. Telangana State Secretariat, State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

2. The Secretary, Telangana Public Service Commission, Hyderabad. 3 Two CCs to GP FOR WOMEN DEVELOPMENT AND CHILD WELFARE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 4. One CC to SRI SRINIVASA RAO MADIRAJU, Advocate [OPUC] 5 One CC to SRI P.S.RAJASHEKAR, SC FOR TGPSC, Advocate (OPUC) 6. Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:1 611212025 ORDER WP.No.30836 of 2025 pl; )'i,1 1 ,l- 3 0 Jr! 2[2,6 r,: i," \) C'\ t t( DISPOSING OF THE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WITHOUT COSTS. IN THE HIGH COURT F.OR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION Nos.25837 25531 and 24496 of2O24 Dated 12th December, 2O25. Between: Mohammad Karishma ald others The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and others COMMON ORDER: AND Petitioners Respondents Since the lis in these wnt pet.itions is one and the same, they are heard together, and are being disposed of by way of this common order.

2. These Writ Petitions are hled seeking to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 to 4 in not considering the Master's Degree of the petitioners obtained from the Acharya Nagarjuna University, Guntur District, through distance mode, for their appointment to the post of Librarian under the control of respondent Nos.3 and 4, by referring to the Public Notice No.F.27-1 /2012 (CPP-II) dated 27.06.2O13, as illegal, arbitrary, bad in Iaw, discriminatory, apart from being violative of Articles 2 PK, J w.I 'o.25837 of 2024 & bdtch 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India, and also Sectir,: . 95 of the Andhra Pradesh Re-organization Act, 2O14, and conseque r .1y, to direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitionr :s fol appointrnent to the post of Librarian, duly recognizing thetr V r ster's Dcgree, by declanng that the Public Notice dated 27.06-2O13 is oaprlicable to the petitioners.

3. Heard Sri Goda Siva, learned Senior Cor-t se1, appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.25837 of 2024; Sri M.V. i .rrna Ilao, learned counsei for the petitioners in W.P.No.25531 of 2024; S' P. Rama Sharala Sharma, Learned counsel for the petitioners in W.I) i o.2.1496 ot 2024; learned Government Pleader for Servrces-I, appear ng on behalf of respondent Nos.l, 3 and 4; Sri P.S. Rajasekhar, learne: Standing Counsel for Telangala Public Service Commission, for responck r t No.2; and Sri G. Viclya Sagar, learned Senior Counsel, representinr Sri Sai Prasen Gundavaram, Iearned counsel for the unofhcial respor dent Nos. 5 to 13 . Although Sri Mohd. Baseer Riyaz, iearned counsel, filec rakalath on behaif of the petitioners in W.P.No.25837 of 2024 on 11.09.i]() i5, the mattcr had already been argued by the earlier iearned counsel arr it rvas posted for orders. In view thereof, this Court has proceeded to 1 ass orders on the basis of the arguments already advanced. 3 PK, J W.P.No.25837 of 2O24 & batch

4.7 Sri Goda Siva, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in W.P.No.25B37 of 2024, submits that Acharya Nagarjuna University is a State University established in the erstwhile State ol Andhra Pradesh under Act 43 of 1976, and as a part of its curriculum, the University started providing undergraduate and postgraduate programmes through distance mode by establishing study centers in different parts of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh. Subsequently, after bifurcation, the study centers continued to operate and the University was enrolling the candidates belonging to the State of Telangana and rvas awarding them certihcates / degrees. Likewise, the petitioners have prosecuted their Master's Degree in Library and lnformation Scier-rce from Acharya Nagarjuna University, Guntur District, through its study centers situated in Telangana, during the years 2O17 Lo 2022, and the said Degrees are aiso duly recognized by the University Grarts Commission and the Distance Education Bureau.

4.2 It is submitted that respondent No.2 issued a General Recruitment Notification vide Notifi cation No.30/2O22 dated 3 l. 12.2022, inviting applications for the post of Librarran under the controi of respondent Nos.3 ald 4. In pursuance thereof, the petitioners, being fully qualifred, applied for the said post, appeared and qualified in the written examination, and their names were also shown in the list of selected 4 PK, J lv.t' | 1 25t'37 of 2024 & batch candidates, and they were accordingly cal1ed for r:cr I ficate verification. However, respondent No.2 has orally refused to consirl r thc candidature of the petitioncrs. on the ground that the Maste ; Degrees of the petitioners werc obtained from the study centers of r cha:1'a Nagarjuna Universit_v, which are allegedly deemed as outside 1er- torial jurisdiction, as per the Pu blic Notice of the University Grant s ( lomnrission dated

27.06.2013. +.3 Lear ned Senior Counsel further submrts th. i Section 95 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2OI4, mandates : lual opportunities for quality highr:r cducation to all students belonging , bolh the State ol Telargana and Andhra Pradesh, with the contin , ation of exrsting admission quota for a period of ten years. As such, th : Dcgrees graits by the State Univer-sities established in the erstwhile Stat e rf Andhra Pradesh are valid lor employment in both the successor States. FIor.l,cver, contrary to the same, respondent No.2 is not accepting the Mast :r's Degrees of the petitioners, in view of the aforesaid Public Notice dated 2

7.06.20t3.

4.4 It is further submitted that the Telangrr ra Social Welfare Educational Institutions Society, through respondenl No.2, had carlier issued Notification No.20/2O17 dated 14.04.2017, for f lling up the posts of Librarian in Residential Schools/Junior Colleges, ar d the candidates, possessing the Master's Degree obtained through dr: tance mode from 5 PK, J W.P No 25837 oI2024 & batch Acharya Nagarjuna University, were considered for recruitment and meritorious candidates were duly appointed, without any objections. It is also submitted that respondent No.3 also had earlier rssued proceedings, filling up the posts of Librarian by way of promotion of Senior Assistalts/Junior Assistants/Typists, wherein, the candidates possessing the Degree in Library Science through distance modc from Acharya Nagarjuna Universit5r, whose admission was also subsequent to the issuance of Public Notice dated 27.O6.2OL3, were also issued rvith promotion orders. As such, the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioners herein for appointment, based on the Master's Degree obtained through distance modc from the study centers of Achar5ra Nagarjuna University, is wholly illegal, arbitrary, bad in law, discriminatory, rriolative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India, and also in violation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 20 14.

5.1 Sri M.V. Rama Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.25531 of 2024, submits that the petitioners herein also possess their Master's Degree in Library Science obtained from Acharya Nagarjuna University, though distance mode, during the years 2016 to 2O2O. As such, in pursuance of Notification No.3O /2O22 dated' 31.72.2022, these petitioners also participated in the recruitment process and stood 6 PK, J rt' 1' . 256:t7 of 2024 6r batch meritorious. Despite the same, on the same ground r urged supra, the respondents were n()t considenng the case of 1l e petitioners for appointment. As suc}r, the petitioners submitted thc representation to resporrdent No.2 on 12-.06.2024, requesting to considcr their qualihcation as r.alid and to :rppr>int them as Libraria:rs based on tl , ir mcrit, but therc was no response. Thus, the petitioners filed W.P.No. t, 86 of 2021 before this Court, wherein, vidc interim order dated O1.O i 2024, this Court directecl respondent No.2 to consider and pass appr()l ri:rte orders on the representation of 1.he petitioners. However, without rr'l cnce to any of the submissions made by the petitioners herein, respon( r nt No.2 passed a speaking order vidc rmpugned Memo.No.453/Rectt-pr tl Ill3/2022 daLed

29.O8.2024, rejecting lhe claim of the petitioners, bv rr terating that they have studies from the study centers, which are not :cated within the tcrritorial jurisdiction of Acharya Nagarjuna University .

5.2 Referring tr.r the earlier recruitment Notifir: Ltion No.28 /2017 , learned counsel submits that respondent No.2 is adoptir g a different stand in different recruitments, as it had accepted the certifir i tes and appointed the meritorious candidates therein, possessing the \ aster's Degree in Library Science. obtained from Acharya .Nagarjuna I ) -riversitSr, through distance mode, while denying to consider the case of Lc petitioners who 1 PK, J W.P.No.25837 of 2024 & batch possess the very same qualification, which is illegal, arbitrary and highly discriminatory.

5.3 It is further submitted that as per Section 95 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2074, even after thc bifurcation, the certificates obtainecl through distance mode from study centers in both the successor States, during the ten years, i.e., 2Ol4 2024, are valid for appointment and higher education. It is submitted that Kakati,\.a University, which has its territorial jurisdiction in Telangana, also operated study centers in the present State of Andhra Pradesh up to 2022, and those certificates are treated as valid, for appointments and prornolions. It is also submitted that the University Grants Commission has also granted approval to Acharya Nagarjuna Universil5r for running various courses, including Master's in Library Science, through Open and Dlstance Learning Mode, continuously from 2Ol4 to 2024. However, ignoring all these facts, respondent No.2 has rejected the candidature of the petitioners treating their valid certificates as invalid, which is wholly illegal and arbitrary.

6. Similarly, Sri P. Rama Sharana Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.No.24496 of 2024, submits that the petitioners herein also possess the Master's Degree in Library Science and in pursuance of Notification No.30 of 2022 dated 31.12.2022, they have also 8 PK, J o 25837 of 2024 & batch applied for the post of Lrbrarian, appeared and stoocl neritorious in the rvritten examination. Ilorvever, their candidature is n. . being considered on the very same grouncl that they possess a Maste' ; Degree obtained through distance rnode lrom Acharya Nagarjuna l-l iversity, rvhich is wholly lllcgal, arbitrary and violativc of principles of nlt r ra1 justicc.

7. Therefore, learned Senior Counsel an(l learned counsel appearing for the petrtioners seek indulgence of this (, urt to declare the Master's Certificates of the petitioners as valid, and cor r equently, to direct the respondents to conslder their case for appointn r nt to the post of Librarian, based on their mcrit, without reference to thL rejection vide oral and impugned orciei:, as thc case may be. Relialce ha; been placed upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sheo Syc m and Others u. State of U.P. ond. Othersl and State of Bihor and t tthers u. Shganna Nand.an Mishra2

8. On the other hand, learned Government Pl,r Lder for Services-I, appearing on bel'ralf o[ respondent Nos. 1, 3 and z submits that in response to the orders issued by respondent No.l to notify the vacant teaching posts in the Dcpartment vide G.O.Ms.No. I 16 lated 22.O7.2022, among other posts, (3 1) vacant posts of Librarian wer: notified by Public r {2oo5) 10 scc 314 2 i.2022) 17 SCC 420 9 PK' J W.P.No.25B37oJ 2024 & batch Service Commission vide Notification No.30/2022 dated 37.12.2022, in accordance with the qualification prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.26 dated

30.O7.2021, read with G.O.Ms.No.178 dated 09.72.2OO5. Subsequently, after conducting the written examination and verification of certificates, a merit list was published by Public Service Commission vide Lr.No.543/RP- IIl/3/2022 dated 04.70.2024, and in pursuance thereof, the Commissioner of Technical Education issued appointment orders to thc meritorious candidates vide File No.CTE-EST2 /SMSL/ 53 / 2024 ESTABLISHMTNT-2-CTE dated O8.7O.2O24. It is further submitted that out of the (3 1) notified posts of Librarian, (2) posts were withheld by the Pub1ic Service Commission and (241 candidates were issued with appoiltment orders, in pursualce of which, the individuals also reported for duty at their respective institutions. It is further submitted that the role of respondent Nos. 1, 3 ald 4 is conlined to notify the vacancies as . per the service Rules and to issue the appointment orders based on the merit list furnished by the Public Service Commission.

9.1 Sri P.S. Rajasekhar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, firstly submits that in compliance with the interim orders of this Court in these writ petitions, a total of (14) vacancies were to be reserved. However, (3) candidates among the writ petitioners, with HaIl Ticket 10 PK, J W.P. \ ,.25837 of 2024 & btttch Nos.23030OO225, 2301O01446 and 23O3OO0453 are not within the zone of consideration, as per thcir merit. As such, in compliar ( e with the interim orders of this Court, a total of (1 1) vacancies rvere resen d.

9.2 It is submitted that respondent No.2 r sued Notrhcatron No.3O/2022 dated 31.12.2022, inviting applications for the posts of Librarial under the control of respondent Nos.3 and and total of (71) vacancies ((4O) under Intermediate Education and (3 t under Technical Education) were notihed, and the qualification prescribt, for the said post, is mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.178 dated O9.12.2OO5. C. ).Ms.No.26 dated

30.O7.2021 and G.O.Ms.No.79 dated 25.11.2OO2. lr pursuance of the said Notihcation, the petitioners herein participated i r the recruitment process. It is submitted that a1l the petitioners herr r r completed their Master's in Library Science in distance mode from ,\ ;harya Nagarjuna University, through its study centcrs situated in Tel:.. rgana, during the years 2Ol7 to 2022. However, the Public Notice of tl'rr r Universit5r Grants Commission dated 27 .O6.2013 bars the Universities to operate study centers outside its territoriai jurisdiction, and as 1; :r the Nagarjuna University Act, the territorial jurisdrction is Guntur an I Ongole Districts only. As such, since the petitioners have joined th: study centers of Acharya Nagarjuna University outside the territorial - rrisdiction of the University, after publication of the said Public Notice, tk , y are ineligible for 11 PK, J W.P.No.25837 of 2024 & batch appointment. Therefore, even if the proviso under Section 95 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, which guarantees equal opportunities to students for higher education, is made appiicable, the petitioner's Master's Degrees are not valid, as the University is not authonzed to operate study centcrs outside its jurisdiction.

9.3 It is further submitted that the University Grants Commission had addressed a letter dated 08.09.2015 to the University, clarifying that the University established or incorporated by or under a State Act shall operate only within the territorial jurisdiction allotted to it under its Act, and that the programmes shall not be offered through franchising arrangement andf or through private institutions/ colleges. It is submitted that the study centers, where the petitioners have studies, are not a part of Acharya Nagarjuna University, and they are in the fashion of franchising arrangement with private institution. As such, the degrees of the petitioners are not valid, and therefore, respondent No.2 has rightly passed the order dated 29.08.2024 (impugned in W.P.No.25531 of 20241, rejecting the caldidature of the petitioners.

9.4 It is further submitted that in similar circumstances, in W.P.No.3O06 of 2021, this Court was pleased to dismiss the writ petition vide order dated 17.08.2022, in view of the fact that the petitioners therein also prosecuted their Degrees though distance education mode from 72 PK, J W F . ..25a37 of 2024 & batch Acharya Nagarjuna University, through the study cer ers rn Telangana, r,vhich are outside the terrrtorial jurisdiction of the I-: r r.ersity. As such, the said principle is squarely appliczrble to the facts of l- : present case. 1 0. 1 Sri G. Vidya Sagar, learned Senior Col; sel appearing on betralf of the unofficial respondents, submits thal ln pursuance of Notification No.3Ol2022 dated 31.12.2022, thc unofhci,L respondents have also participated in the recruitment process, appeared l rr and cleared the written examination, and u,ere called for certificate vr:l i ication. However, in view of the subsrsting interim orders of this Court, t r lY rr,'ere not issued wrth the appointment orders. It is submitted that mer,' securing of higher marks and merit in the general ranking list does not er LtIe the petitioners to bc considered for appointment, owing their urrr ( :ognized Master's Degree certificates.

10.2 It is submitted that in response to the l: -ter addressed by respondent No.2 dated 17.O5.2024, Acharya Nagarjuna lniversity, Guntur District, vide letter dated 06.O6.2024, communicated r list o[ candidates who have passed B.Li.Sc./M.Li.Sc. Degrecs from tl-r,' : Universit5r from distance education mode, wherein, the petitioner's rames were also included, and against their name, it was recordec that they have undertaken their studies through distance mode ir Telangana State. Further, against the column, thether the study cet tre is within the 13 PK. J W.P.No.25837 of 2024 & b.ltch jurisdiction limits of the University?', it was recorded as les', as per Ref-3 of Part-XI of the Andhra Pradesh Reorgan2ation Act, 2014. However, the said Acharya Nagarjuna University is located in Andhra Pradesh.

10.3 It is submitted that the University Grants Commission had earlier issued a Public Notice dated 27 .06.2O13, whereby, certain guidelines were issued and the Universities were requested to offer only those programmes approved by the University Grants Commission and to follow the policy on territorial jurisdiction and study centers. As such, the Universities are not authorized to open study centers or off-campus centers beyond the territoriai jurisdiction of such University, and a University established under an Act shall only operate within the territorial jurisdiction atlotted to it under its Act. Thus, since the territorial jurisdiction of Acharya Nagarjuna University in only confined to Guntur, Prakasham ald Krishna district, which now form a part of the State of Andhra Pradesh, the Master's Degrees obtained by the petitioners, through study centers in Telalgana, are unrecognized. It is submitted that the Notification dated 31.12.2022 cleaiy specified that the educationa-l qualihcation certificates obtarned through distance education mode, contrary to the notihcation of the University Gralts Commission dated

27.06.2013 are invalid. Therefore, the petitioners' names were rightly excluded from the provisional selection 1ist. 74 PK, J W F , 1.25837 of 2024 & batch

10.4 It is further submitted that Section 95 of il e Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, provides for extension of eclt r 1 opportunities for the students to get admissions in educational inst11.L 1 onal as provident under Article 3 17-D of the Constitution of India, which I ad continued for a further period of (10) years, frorn 2Ol4-2O24. Hou'er': , the said proviso does not have any beneht of extending off-campus r nters outside the territorial jurisdiction of Acharya Nagarjuna Universitv. Therefore, degrees obtained from the stLrdy centers in Telalgana Distnc, are not valid and recognized under the Act. It is further submitted :l at the petitioners cannot claim negative equality, and seek a directror to validate their degrees, which zrre contrary to law.

11. Therefore, learned Government Pleader. learned Standing Counsel, as well as the learned Senior Counsel appean Lg on behalf of the respondents pray this Court to dismiss the present vrit petitions. In support of their case, reliance has been placed upon th : Cecisions of the 1 Honl:le Apex Court Prof. Yashpal and ant ther u- State of Chhattisgarh qnd others3 and Ramesh Clt tndra Shah and. others u. Anil Joshi and. othersa; I (2OO5) 5 SCC 42O 4 (2Or3) 11 SCC 3O9 15 PK, J W.P.No.25a37 of 2024 & batch 11 111 Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Subramanga Kurnar Y.V. u Southern Power Distrtbution Co. of A.P. and otherss; aod This Court in W.P.No.3006 of 2O2l dated 17.O8.2022, and W.P.No. 13823 of 2023 dated L6.O7.2024.

12.1 In reply, learned counsel for the petitioners in W-P-No.25531 of 2O24 submits that the petitioners have obtained their Degrees from Acharya Nagarjuna University through distance mode, with due approvals granted by the University Gralts Commission, and it has also been clarified by the University Grants Commission vide letter dated 27.O3.2024 that in view of Section 95 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act,2014, Acharya Nagarjuna Universlty is deemed to have territorial jurisdiction to operate study centers both in Telangana for a period of ten years. Further, simila; clarification was also issued by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Open University vide letter dated 22.07.2025 that it also had the jurisdiction to operate study centers in Andhra Pradesh wnt1l.2024.

72.2 It is further submitted that the Public Service Commission has been treating the M.Li.Sc. Degree and other degrees obtained from Acharya Nagarjuna University and Sri Venkateswara Universily through distance mode from 2Ol4 to 2024 as valid, and accepted the said certificates during 5 2007 (5) ALD 667 16 PK, J W L 0.25837 oJ 2024 & batch earlier recruitments and promotions. It is also r ubnritted that in pursuance of DSC-2O24, the State Government had rr:c r etly appointed one Ms- A. Roja as Language Pandit (Telugu) based on her i', stgraduate Degree in Telugu obtained in 20 18 from Sri Venkateswara Iniversity through drstar-rce education mode. Further, respondent No.ll I as also appointed one candidate as Junior Lecturer (Telugu) in pursrrr rce of Notihcation No.22/2O22, in spite of the fact that the said can(l late pursued her Ivlaster's Degree in Telugu during 2016, through distan; ' education mode. ).2.3 It is further submitted that the reliance plz , ed upon the order in W.P.No.30O6 r:f 2027 is misconceived, as the ser I order has becn passed wrthout consiclering the scope of Section 6 art l 95 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, and G.O.Ms.No.17[ lated i8.05.2014, and also since the said writ petition arose in a dlfi rent context, i.e., admission to B.trd./B.P.Ed. It is further submitt r I that in similar circumstances, where different stands were taken b1,t re respondents in respect of the certificates of the candidates, resulting rr :ermination of one set of candldates, this Court allowed W.P.No.7746 of 2t : 3, which rvas also conhrmed by the Division Bench of this Court , ide judgment in W.A.No. 1118 of 2023. It is further submitted that thr: University Grants Commission had stated that the State Government a - 1 the Universities themselves are competent to decide the validity of the r.r rtificates, and the 77 PK, J W.P.No.25837 of2024 & batch State Government has never objected the certificates of the petitioners. As such, the Master's Degree certihcates of the petitioners are vaiid. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled for appointment as Librarians, based on their merit.

13. Having regard to the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the respective parties and on perr.sal of the material available on record, it is evident that in pursuance of the Notification No.3Ol2022 dated 31.12.2022, the petitioners applied for the post of Librarian under the control of respondent Nos.3 and 4, participated in the recruitment process, appeared in the written examination, and stood meritorious therein. However, their caldidature for appointment was rejected on the sole ground that they possess the qualihcation of Master's in Library Science, obtained from Acharya Nagarjuna University through distance education mode from its study centers situated in the State of Telangana.

14. The core dispute emanating for adjudication of this Court is whether the respondents are justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioners for appointment to the post of Librarial, by treating the petitioners' Master's Degree certificates as invalid, while earlier considering the case of the similarly situated individuals. 18 PK, J W.P.\ t.25837 of 2O24 & batch 1 5. Before adjudrcating upon the validity I the petitioners' Master's Degree Certihcates, it is apposite to not€ rat in an earlier 1 recrrritment vide Notification No.20/2017 dated 14.O4.,: t 17, issued by the Telangana Social Welfare Residential Educational Insti rtions Society, the candidates possessing the very qualihcations of Bachel'r 's and Master's in Library Scicnce, obtained through distance education n: de from the study centers ol Acharya Nagarjuna University, operating or iside the State of Andhra Pradesh, were not only permitted to participatt n the recruitment proc.:ss, but were also selected and appointed as Libr.L ians in respecti.ve institutions. The petitioners have placed on rec;cr 1a copy of the procecdings in Rc.No.G/TS/5379 12019 /Z-V|(G) lL 25.O9 .2O 19 , to demonstrate the appointment of I Venkateshwarlu, who possesses Bachelor's of Lib' rrarian 9 re Mr. Bandaru ry Science from Acharya Nagarjuna University,

16. Likewise, in respect of the recruitment for tL : post of Librarian in Government Junior Colleges conducted under Notifi, ation No.28/2017 dated 02.06.2O 17, the Public Service Commission had rejected the candidature of individua,ls holding the Master's in Libr r ry Science Degree obtained from the Unrversities in the State of Tamil Nac r , on the ground of territorial justification. However, the Degrees obta: ed from Acharla Nagarjuna University through distance education 'rode were never 19 PK, J W.P.No.25837 of 2024 & batch objected, and even appointments were issued to such candidates, on the basis of their merit. The petitioners have placed on record the relevant selection list and service particulars of certain individuals possessing the very same qualification.

17. Further, it has been brought to the notice of this Court that several individuals who acquired their Master's in Library Scicnce Degrees through distance education mode from the studv centers of Acharya Nagarjuna University in Telangana after the Public Notice of the University Grants Commission dated 27 .06.2013, were also considered lbr promotion to the post of Librarian in Government Junior Collcges. Thc petitioners have also placed on record the details of such candidates, viz., Mrs. Y. Vijaya Laxmi, Mrs. A. Praveena, Mrs. G. Swaroopa Rani, Mrs. N. Madhuri and Mr. A. Gangadhar, who are working as Librarians in Government Junior Colleges, having M.Li.Sc. qualificatiorr, obtained through distance education mode from Acharya Nagarjuna University from 2018 to 2O2O.

18. Similarly, in pursuance of the Teachers Recruitment under DSC-2O24, one candidate Ms. A. Roja, who possesses a Master's of Arts Degree, obtained in the year 2O18, through distance education mode from Sri Venkateswara Universit5r, which also operates beyond the State of Telangana, as that of Acharya Nagarjuna University, was appointed as Language Pandit (Telugu). The petitioners have placed on record a copy of 20 PK' J -W.F.\ .25a.37 of 2024 & b@tch the proceedings dated 09.1O.2024 and her M.A. Certific: t:, to demonstratc her appointment on the basis of such certificate. Tht: s rn-re is not denied by lhc respondents I9. In vies, of the above, it is clear that the res - rndent authorities have consistcntl.y acccpted the same qualification as th: . of the pet-itioners herein, i.e., Master's l)egree in Library Science obtainr r through r,listancc education mode from Acharya Nagarjuna UniversitSr o tside the State of Andhra Pradesh, and on the basis of such certificates. appointments and promotions were granted to the said individuals. As s r:l-r, this Court is o[ the view that the action of respondcnt No.2 in reje<:tL,g/not considering the r:laim of thc petitioners, who stand on an identic r footir-rg zrs that of the aforesaid individlrals, amounts to a clear discr mination between similarly placed caldidates alld also violates Article', 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, which actron of the respondents . rnnot be sustained in [aw.

20. It is pertinent to note that none of the afor:;aid instances were ever speciltcally denicd by the respondents, apart fronL the sole contention that the petitioners c:rnnot claim 'negative equality' for ppointment mereiy because certain similar individuals were granted app(,t ttments. However, this Court is of the considered view that the instar I case does not fall under the principle of 'negative equality', as the petiti ) lers are not relying 2L PK, J W.P.No.25837 of2O24 & batch upon a single appointment or promotion to claim parit1.. In fact, the petitioners have demonstrated a series of recruitments and promotions during several years, in due acceptance of the degree certificates obtained through distance education mode from the very same University. Therefore, in the pecuhar facts and circumstances of the case, the contention of the respondents that the petitioners cannot claim negative equallty cannot be countenanced. Hence, the decisions relied upon by the respondents are inapplicable to the facts of the present case.

21. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that impugned rej ection/ non-consideration of the petitioners heretn for appointment to the post of Librarian is who11y unsustatnable on the sole ground of cliscriminatory treatment vis-dL-vis similarly situated individuals.

22. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are disposed of directing the respondents to consider/re consider the claim of the petitioners for appointment to the post of Librarian, in pursuance of Notification No.3O12022 dated 3I.72.2022, purely based on their merit and without reference to the rejcction order vide Memo. No.453/Rectt-pool-Il /312022 dated 29.O8.2024 (irnpugned in W.P.No.2553l of 20241, as was done in the cases of appointment/ promotions of similarly situated candidates, as expeditiously as possible, preferabiy within a period of eight (O8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 22 PK, J W.f' \ ' 25837 oJ2024 & batch Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in t'rse writ petitions, shall stand closed. No costs. Datc:12.12.2025 GSP JUSTICE t'ILLA KARTHIK