Dismissed

Dumpa Manogna Shobha Reddy v. The District Selection Committee

Telangana HC2 Jan 2014WP/36903/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a writ petition challenging the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal's order rejecting an application for the post of Junior Accountant. The applicant failed to meet eligibility criteria under Notification No.38/2011 as her B.Com (Revised) degree was not deemed equivalent to the required B.Com (Computers).

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed.

Dumpa Manogna Shobha Reddy Vs The District… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.SHANKAR NARAYANA WRIT PETITION No.36903 of 2013

¶2

ORDER: (per RSR, J)

¶3

Applicant in O.A.No.6189 of 2013, filed this Writ Petition questioning order, dated 04.09.2013, passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad.

¶4

Respondent No.2 herein issued notification No.38 of 2011, dated 28.12.2011, calling for applications to fill up the posts of Junior Accountant in Treasuries and Accounts Subordinate Service and Junior Assistant in Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Services under Group-IV Services. The petitioner was one of the applicants, who responded to such notification and attended for written examination. During the course of verification of educational certificates, the respondents noticed that the petitioner is not fulfilling the eligibility criteria as she is not in holding a degree in B.Com (Computers/Computer Applications) and thereby, she was not appointed to the post of Junior Accountant. Aggrieved of the same, she filed aforesaid O.A. before the Tribunal with the prayer, which reads as under:

¶5

“Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying this Tribunal to call for the connected records including Notification No.38/2011, dated 28.12.2011 and declare the impugned Proc. Vide Lr.No.APSCHE/PGP/equiv/APPSC/B.Com/2013,

¶6

6.6.2013 of the 3^rd respondent and the confirmation of the same Proc. Vide Lr.No.1002/Rs.-12/2009, dt.19.06.2013 of the 2^nd respondent is highly illegal, improper, unjust and set aside the same which is contrary to the above Notification and further direct the respondents 1 to 4 to consider the case of the applicant for appointment to the post of Junior Accountant in Treasuries and Accountant Subordinate Service in APMS; under Group-IV Service as per the above Notification.”

¶7

Mainly, it was the case of the petitioner that she has passed some Computer related papers in B.Com (Revised) Course, as such, she is treated to be in possession of required qualifications notified in the aforesaid notification for the posts of Junior Accountant in Treasuries. The Tribunal after hearing both sides and perusing the material papers available on record, examined the claim of the petitioner and by recording a finding that she did not fulfill the educational qualifications notified in notification No.38 of 2011, dated 28.12.2011, for the posts of Junior Accountant in Treasuries, dismissed the O.A. by the impugned order.

¶8

In this Writ Petition, we have heard both sides and perused the material papers available on record.

¶9

A perusal of notification No.38 of 2011, dated 28.12.2011, indicates that in para-2 thereof, educational qualifications are notified and the portion relevant for the purpose of this Writ Petition reads as under: PARA-2: EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS:

¶10

Applicants must possess the qualifications from a recognized University as detailed below or equivalent thereto, subject to various specifications in the relevant service rules and as indented by the department as on the date of notification.

¶11

Post Name of the Post Educational Qualifications Code

¶12

		Intermediate Examination
		conducted by the Board of
		Intermediate Examination
		or any other equivalent
		examination.
		AND
		Pass in any one of the following Certificate course
		Examination conducted by
		the Board of Technical
		Education and Training,
		A.P., Hyderabad
		(a)Office Automation
		(b) PC Maintenance
	Junior Accountants in	and Trouble Shootin
01	Treasuries and Accounts	g (c)Web designing
	subordinate service.	OR
		Must hold a degree in
		Bachelor of Computer
		Application (BCA) or B.Sc.,
		(Comp.) or B.Com (Comp.)
		or B.A. (Comp.) or
		B.Tech/B.E. with Computer
		Science or Information
		Technology equivalent
		examination of above,
		recognized by any
		university in India
		established or incorporated
		by or under Central Act,
		Provincial Act or a State
		Act or an Institution
		recognized by the UGC.

¶13

From the above, it is clear that for the posts of Junior Accountant in Treasuries, the candidate must hold a degree in Bachelor of Computer Applications (BCA) or B.Sc. (Computers) or B.Com (Computers) or B.A.

¶14

(Computers) or B.Tech/B.E. with Computer Science or Information Technology. As per the material placed before this Court, the petitioner is in possession of degree in B.Com (Revised) Course of Andhra University.

¶15

It is to be noticed that the Tribunal in the impugned order, while examining the claim of the petitioner, has recorded a finding that she did not fulfill the educational qualifications notified in notification No.38 of 2011, dated 28.12.2011, for the posts of Junior Accountant in Treasuries. Further, even in the material papers filed along with the Writ Petition, there is letter, dated 06.06.2013, addressed by the Andhra Pradesh State Council for Higher Education, Hyderabad, to the Secretary, Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, Hyderabad, in Lr.No.APSCHE/PGP/equiv/APPSC/B.Com/2013. In the said letter, it is stated in clear terms that B.Com (Revised) course of Andhra University is not equivalent to B.Com (Computers/Computer Applications) course offered by the Universities in Andhra Pradesh. It is to be noted that whether a degree of particular institution is equivalent to the qualification notified in the notification, or not, is a matter required to be determined by the academic bodies. Further, as per letter, dated 06.06.2013, it can be said that

¶16

the petitioner is not in possession of educational qualifications criteria notified in the notification No.38 of 2011, dated 28.12.2011.

¶17

For the aforesaid reasons and in view of the reasons recorded by the Tribunal, we do not find any valid ground in this Writ Petition warranting interference in the impugned order.

¶18

The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶19

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending in this appeal shall stand closed. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J

¶20

2^nd JANUARY, 2014.

¶21

________________________ A.SHANKAR NARAYANA, J

¶22

kvni

Dumpa Manogna Shobha Reddy v. The District Selection Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dumpa Manogna Shobha Reddy v. The District Selection Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Union of India, rep.by the The General Manager, Vs a.S.Acharyulu

J.N. Siva Prasad S/o. Late Basavaiah, Vs The District Collector (Sw)

Government of a.P., rep by Secretary to Government Finance Vs B. Radhaiah S/o Venkataiah

Mannam Venkata Ramaiah Vs Ponnam Visweswara Rao

Shri Mahavir Ferro Alloys Pvt. Limited Vs M/s. Pps Enviro Power Private Limited

The Government of Andhra Pradesh Vs Ch. Satyanarayana