M/s Kathi Gopinadh Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M/S KATHI GOPINADH, S/O CH VENKATESWARLU, AGED 30 YEARS, OCCU UN EMPLOYEE R/O D.NO.4-441/1, RAMAKRISHAN PURAM, NANDIGAMA SATTENAPALLI MANDAL, PAINDU DISTRICT - 522403 MOBILE NO 8886364991

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238.

¶15

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GRAMA SACHIVALAYAM AND WARD SACHIVALAYAM DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238.

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER OF PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, PVS ICON/EMPIRE BUILDING, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522501.

¶17

THE COMMISSIONER OF GRAMA SACHIVALAYAM AND WARD SACHIVALAYAM DEPARTMENT, PLOT NO. 11 AND 12,

¶18

::2::

¶19

BACKSIDE OF BSNL TELEPHONE EXCHANGE, NEAR APIIC COLONY, AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520007.

¶20

THE COMMISSIONER OF HORTICULTURE, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, TTPC BUILDINGS, 1ST FLOOR, OLD MARKET YARD, CHUTTUGUNTA, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522004.

¶21

THE DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEE, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN/DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 531024.

¶22

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶23

::3::

¶24

This Court made the following ORDER:

¶25

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioners for the following relief:

¶26

to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring (a) the action of the respondents in excluding B.Sc. (BZC) / B.Sc. (Horticulture subject) qualification from Notification No. 01/Horti/2019 dated 26.07.2019 as illegal and arbitrary (b) the retrospective application of G.O.Ms.No.64 dated 19.06.2020 as unconstitutional and (c) consequently direct the respondents to consider the petitioner for selection to the post of Village Horticulture Assistant based and to pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and interest of Justice and to pass

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶28

The writ petition is filed aggrieved by the illegal and arbitrary action of the respondents in excluding the qualifications of B.Sc. (BZC) / B.Sc. (with Horticulture as a subject) from Notification No. 01/Horti/2019, dated 26.07.2019.

¶29

The case of the petitioner is that he possesses B.Sc. (Botany, Zoology and Chemistry – BZC) qualification and applied for the post of Village Horticulture Assistant pursuant to Notification No. 01/Horti/2019 dated 26.07.2019. He appeared for the written examination held on 04.09.2019 , qualified on merit, and was called for certificate verification by

¶30

::4::

¶31

the District Collector, Ananthapuram, and the Chairman (DSC) . However, his candidature was rejected solely on the ground that he was not an inservice candidate . The petitioner submits that, pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.110, PR & RD Department dated 19.07.2019, the Government sanctioned posts for Village Secretariats, including 4,000 posts for Horticulture , granting a one-time relaxation for recruitment prior to framing/amendment of service rules. Though B.Sc. (BZC) was initially included in the notification and later restricted only to in-service candidates, the petitioner, possessing the said qualification, applied with a legitimate expectation and progressed up to the final stage of selection. It is further submitted that the petitioner’s candidature was rejected solely on the ground that he was not working on contract basis in the Horticulture Department as on the date of notification, despite having secured merit in the written examination. In the same recruitment process, a substantial number of posts remained vacant due to non-availability of eligible candidates. Subsequently, fresh notifications and corrigenda were issued in the year 2020, wherein relaxations were repeatedly extended only to inservice candidates, including contract employees possessing B.Sc. (BZC), B.Sc., M.Sc. (with Horticulture as a subject) and even B.Sc. (Agriculture) , pursuant to representations and Government memos. The petitioner submits that such selective extension of relaxations in favour of in-service candidates, while denying the same to similarly placed non-

¶32

::5::

¶33

service candidates like the petitioner, is discriminatory and arbitrary . Further, the petitioner’s candidature was rejected without passing any speaking order, whereas several similarly situated candidates were granted relief only because they approached this Court earlier.

¶34

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in similar circumstances, this Court, in W.P. No. 6286 of 2023 and batch, was pleased to grant relief to the petitioners therein, and accordingly prays that the same relief be extended to the present writ petitioner.

¶35

Considering the same, this court is also deems it appropriate to issue the following directions:-

¶36

(i) The respondents shall publish the merit list in respect of the writ petitioner, in accordance with law;

¶37

(ii) The respondents shall process the result of the writ petitioner in accordance with law;

¶38

(iii) if the rank secured by the present writ petitioner is higher than the rank secured by candidates already selected, the seniority of the writ petitioner shall be reckoned based on overall merit;

¶39

(iv) Such writ petitioner who is now recruited shall be entitled only to notional seniority without back wages, for a period of

¶40

::6::

¶41

12 weeks from the date of uploading of the common order on the website of this Court; and

¶42

(v) The Government shall complete the entire process within a period of 12 weeks from the date of uploading of the common order on the website of this Court.

¶43