submitted that the respondents have not produced any documents to disclose that they had obtained approval from the competent authority to set out eligibility condition in contravention of the cabinet decision. Moreover, the respondents have not been able to show any recruitment rules or the source of power by which they could have set out any eligibility conditions for selecting DPCs. It is submitted that although in the advertisement dated 05.07.2019, it was mentioned that there was an approval from competent authority, but the respondents have not disclosed the existence of ay approval. The learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the Memorandum of Association as well as Rules of SSAS, it is submitted that all the appointments were required to be made by the Executive Committee of SSAS, but the advertisement impugned in W.P.(C) 228(AP)/2019 and W.P.(C) 420(AP)/2019 was issued by Deputy State Project Director (DSPD for short), who was not the member of the Executive Committee and could not have issued any such advertisement without disclosing the source of his power to issue such an advertisement. It is also submitted that after the result notification dated 23.10.2019 was published, by issuing a series of orders, the State respondents have started to take coercive action against the petitioners so as to revert the petitioners back to their original posts that they were holding before being appointed as DPC. Further assailing the result notification dated 23.10.2019, it is submitted that the said result sheet is vitiated by contravention of the eligibility conditions contained in the advertisement dated 05.07.2019 because the candidates whose name appear in Sl. No. 8, 19 and 21 were Science Teachers/ Headmaster/ Headmistress respectively whereas, the eligibility conditions excluded the appointment of Science Teachers, Maths Teacher, Head-Master and Vice Principal. By referring to the additional affidavit filed by the petitioners in WP(C) 228(AP)/2019, it has been submitted that the Executive Committee of ISSE in its meeting held on 14.05.2018 had envisaged that only one DPC remained in each district under the new scheme out of two separate DPCs that existed under the erstwhile SSA and RMSA, for which an appropriate mechanism was to be worked out centrally for implementation of the new scheme and put up the administrative structure for the decision of the government. It is submitted that only after the said meeting dated 14.05.2018, the State Cabinet, in its meeting held on 10.08.2018, took a decision that the selection of DPC was to be made out of the coordinators working under erstwhile SSA/ RMSA. Accordingly, it is submitted that after such decision, there was no scope for the DSPD to set out any new eligibility conditions in the impugned advertisement dated 05.07.2019, without disclosing his source of power to issue such advertisement.
