Allowed

Ragi Subhashanachary v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Mar 2025WP/3913/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A BC-B candidate with 56% post-graduation but 43% graduation challenged his exclusion from the School Assistant (Social Studies) selection list despite lower-ranked candidates being selected. Relying on the NCTE amendment exempting pre-cutoff B.Ed. graduates and prior judgments, the High Court held the exclusion violative of Articles 14 and 16 and directed consideration for appointment.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider petitioner's appointment as School Assistant (Social Studies) applying NCTE amendment and cited judgments; no costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

Ragi Subhashanachary Vs State of Telangana — Education and Admissions | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³³⁰⁰ ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 3913 OF 2019

¶7

Between:

¶8

Ragi Subhashanachary, S/o Chandramouli, Age- 43 years Occ- Unemployed, R/o 19-1^'l-415, Opp Andhra Bank Shambhuni pet, Warangal - Telangana - 506002 HT. No. 1 7 52928543

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 State of Telangana, Rep. through Special Chief Secretary School Education(General Department) Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶12

2 Telangana State Public Service Commission, Rep. by its Secretary, Prathibha Bhavan Nampally, Hyderabad-500'1 03

¶13

Commissioner and Director of School Education, Telangana State, Hyderabad

¶14

District Educational Officer, Warangal District

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Selection Notification daled 12.02.2019 published by the 2nd Respondent of provisionally select6d candidates for appointment to the post of School Assistant (Social Studies) under notification No.5212017 dated 21 .10.2O1 7 issued by the 2nd Respondent excluding Petitioners hall ticket number who is more meritorious than several other selected candidates in his reserved category in Warangal District as arbitrary, totally illegal, without jurisdiction, violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently set-aside the same by further directing the Respondents to select and appoint petitioner to the^post of School Assistant (Social Studies) under Notification No.5212017 dated 21.10.2017 issued by the 2nd Respondent as per his merit in BC-B reserved categdries in Warangal District with exemplary costs

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay all further proceedings pursuant to the Notification No. 52120.17 dated 21.1O.2O17 issued by the 2nd Respondent to the post of School Assist;ant (Social Studies) including appointments pursuant to the impugned selectiorr notification dated 12.02.2019 in so far as Warangal District

¶19

lA NO: 2 OF 2019

¶20

Between:

¶21

'1 . The State o-l Telangana, Rep. through Special Chief Secrr:tary School Education(General Department) Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶22

Commissioner and Director of School Education, Telangar-ra State, Hyderabad

¶23

District Educational Officer, Warangal District

¶24

...PETITIONERS/RESPONOENTS No.1,3&4

¶25

AND

¶26

1 Ragi Subhashanachary, S/o Chandramouli, Aqe- 43 vear:; Occ- Unemoloved. Y^o^^1^9^-'l l:+.1S,_9pp 4t9hra^{Bank Shambhuni pet, War;rngat- Tetarigaha-} 506002 HT.No. 1 752928543

¶27

...RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

¶28

2 Telangana State Public Service Commission, Rep. by its Secretary, prathibha Bhavan Nampally, Hyderabad-5001 03

¶29

...RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS

¶30

(Respondent No.2 in W.P is not necessary pa(y in this petition)

¶31

Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court rnay be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 2610212019 in IA.No. 1 of 2o19 in w.p. No. 3913 of 2019 and dismiss the Writ Petition

¶32

lA NO: 3 OF 2019

¶33

Between:

¶34

Telangana. State Public Service Commission, Rep. by its S,:cretary, Nampally, Hyderabad

¶35

...PETITIONER/2ND RESPONDENT IN WP NO.3913/2019

¶36

AND

¶37

Ragi Subhashanachary, S/o Chandramouli, Aoe- 43 vears Occ- Unemployed, E/g^19-1 1:415,^{Opp Andhra BankShambhuiipet, W} arangal - Telangana - 506002 HT.No. 1 752928543

¶38

2 -' rhe Oepartment State ",,",,"n,;, Secretiriat, Saifabid X:;f}::)"'fi:lI'"".Iil Hyderabad 50O 004Hyderabad 50O 00450O 004004^{.J"ffi;I?;ffi"'}

¶39

-' Oepartment State ",,",,"n,;, Secretiriat, Secretiriat, Saifabid X:;f}::)"'fi:lI'"".Iil Hyderabad 50O 004Hyderabad 50O 00450O 004004

¶40

Commissioner^{and Directorof School Education, Telangana State'} Hyderabad

¶41

District Educational^{Officer,Warangal District}

¶42

...RESPONDENT/1 "t^{RESPONDENT IN WP'NO.3913/2019}

¶43

Petition under^{section '151 CPC praying that in the'circumstances stated in} the affidavit filed^{in support of the petition,the High Court maybe pleased} -^to vacatetheinterimordersdaled26lO2t2OlgpassedinlA.No.ll2019inW.P.No 3913 of 2019

¶44

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRl.ALLIKASURESH}

¶45

Counsel for the^{Respondents:GP FOR SERVICESlll}

¶46

The Court made^{the following: ORDER}

¶47

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

¶48

w PETIT ON No.3913 ()F o19

¶49

ORAL ORDER:

¶50

The petitioner, belonging to the BC-B category and holding a Graduate degree in Arts with less than 45olo marks along with a Master,s degree in political Science with over 507o, applied for the post of Schoc,l Assistant (Social Studies, Telugu Medium) under Notification No.52/2077 dated 2t.70.20t7 issued by the 2nd Respondent, pursuant to which he received a hall ticket and appeared for the examination held on 04.03.2018. The notification stipulated eligibility as either a Graduate with two optional subjects or their allied subjects with 50o/o marks, or any post Graduate degree with 50o/o marks, with a 5yo relaxation in marks for SC, ST, OBC, and differently-abled candidates. The petitioner secured 73.485 marks, ranked 182 in the State pnd 17 in Warangal District, and was within the t zone of consideration for selection; he attended

¶51

¶52

certificate verification and submitted all^required documents. However, in the^{impugnedselection} notification^published on^{12.02.2OL9listing} provisionally seleeted candidates, his hall ticket^humber was omitted while candidates^{from the sameBC-B} category with lower^{marks-72.403, 72.222, 7L.556,} and 70.466, ranked 260,27L,326,^{and 434} respectively-were included.^{The petitionersubmitteda} representation to the^{2nd Respondent on 15.02'2019} pointing out the discrepancy, but^{received no response,} and was merely advised^{to return after 10 days, even} as the recruitment^{process continued; thus, he filed the} present Writ Petition challenging the^exclusionand seeking redress.

¶53

Heard Mr. A. Suresh, learned^{counsel for the} petitioner; and learned G.P for Services-Ill.^Perused the record.

¶54

¶55

j..

¶56

Learned counsel for the petitioner, while making submissions on the lines of writ affidavit, would essentially contend that the impugned actiorr of the 2nd respondent in excluding the petitioner,s hall ticket number from the selection notification issued pursuant to Notification No.52/2017, while inctuding less meritorious candidates under the same reserved category, is arbitrary, illegal, violative of Articles 14, 16, and 27 of the Constitution, and contrary to the rules of procedure and the principle of merit_based selection. It is submitted that the petitioner holds a Graduate Degree with 43% and a postgraduate Degree with 560/o in political Science from recognized institutions, and had also completed his B.Ed. in 2O7L; thus, as per the amended NCTE Regulations dated 13.11.2019, the minimum percentage requirement in graduation is not applicable to him. Despite this, and despite an interim order of this Hon,ble Court dated 26.02.2079 directing verification of eligibility and

¶57

¶58

consideration for^{provisional selection,the respondents} failed to act,^prompting the^{filing of Contempt Case} No.323/2020. The learned^{counselfurther relies on the} decision of this Hon'ble^{Court in W.P. No.3305 of 2019} and its affirmation^{by the Division Bench in W'A'} No.511 of 2019,^{wherein similarlyplacedcandidates} were directed to be^{consideredbased on their} postgraduate qualifications. It^{is furtherpointedout} that the respondents^{have failed to address the legal} and factual submissions^{made in the writ petition, and} that the case of the^{petitioneris squarely covered by} the^judEment in^{W.P. No.4055 of2019 dated} 3L.0L.2025, a copy^{of which has been placed on record} by way of a memo.^{Hence, the learned counselurges} that the writ^{petition deservesto be allowed with} appropriate directions^{in the interestof justice.}

¶59

Learned counsel for the respondent^{Nos.1, 3 and}

¶60

4, basing on the counter affidavit, essentially^contends

)

that the^petitioner is^{not eligible for selection to the} post of School Assistant (Social Studies) under Notification No.52l2OL7 dated^{21.LO.20L7, as he failed} to meet the minimum educational^{qr-ralifications} prescribed under G.O.Ms.No.25, Education Department, dated 10.10.2017, which has statutory^force; specifically, while the^petitioner secured^{5692omarks in} his M.A. in Political Science, he obtained^{only 43o/o} marks in his B.A., whereas a minimum of^45o/ois required for BC category candidates eitherⁱⁿ Graduation or Post Graduation,^provided they^studied two prescribed optional subjects; the^petitioner studied only one optional subject-Political Science-in^Post Graduation, and although he studied two optional subjects in Graduation, the marks fall short of the prescribed threshold; mere possession of 50o/o in Post Graduation in a single optional subject does not satisfy eligibility under Rule 4(1)(D) of the Rules; frrrther, it is argued that there is no^provision in thel rules for

¶65

¶66

rounding off of marks, and initial issuance of^{a hall} ticket does not confer eligibility as applications^were accepted online without^{pre-verificationof certificates,} which was later rectified during certificate^{verification;} the interim order dated 26.02.20L9^{was compliedwith} by verifying the^{petitioner'seligibility, but he was} rightly excluded from the^{selection list due to non-} fulfilment of the academic criteria,^{and any relaxation} would amount to violation of G.O.Ms.No.25^{and NCTE} guidelines; hence, the impugned selection notification^is legal, valid, and in strict conformity^{with the rules,and} the petitioner's claim for selection^lacksmerit.

¶67

Having considered the respective^{contentionsand} perused the record, it may be noted that the^petitioner, belonging to the BC-E category,^possesses a Bachelor's degree with 43olo marks and a Master's degree with 560/o marks in Political Science from a recognized university. He also completed a Bachelor of Education

¶68

¶69

¶70

(B.Ed.) in 2011. Pursuant to Notification No.5212017 dated 21.70.2Ot7 issued by the 2nd Respondent for the post of School Assistant (Social Studies), the petitioner applied and was eligible as per the norms. However, his hall ticket number was excluded from the selection list, while candidates with lower merit were included. The petitioner contends that this exclusion is arbitrary and violative of Articles 74, 76, and 21 of the Constitution of India. The core issue revolves around the eligibility criteria concerning the minimum percentage required in graduation for appointment as School Assistant (Social Studies). The petitioner argues that as per the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) amendment dated 13.11.2Ot9, the minimum percentage of marks in graduation shall not apply to those who had already taken admission to B.Ed. prior to 29.07.2011. Since the petitioner completed his B.Ed. in 2011, he talls within this exemption. Furthermore, the petitioner relies on t!e- judgment in Writ petition No.4055/2019 dated

¶71

I I

¶72

¶73

31.01.2025,^{wherein the Court allowed a similar} petition, directing consideration^{of candidateswho had} secured more than^{50% marks in post-graduation} despite having^{less than 45o/oin} graduation. This judgment was upheld in^{Writ Appeal No'511 of 2019} dated 11.09.2079.

¶74

in their counter^affidavit, 6. The^resPondents, reiterate the^{eligibility criteriaand contend that the} petitioner does not meet^{the required45o/oin} graduation. However,^{they fail to addressthe NCTE} amendment and^{the subsequent judgmentsthat} provide relief to candidates^{in similar situations'The} respondents'^{reliance on the original eligibility criteria} without considering^{the amendments and judicial} pronouncements is untenable.^{Moreover, the inactionof} the respondents^{despite the interim order dated} 26.72.2079 in W.P.No'3973/2079,^{directing verification} of the^{petitioner's eligibility, further substantiates the} i- petitioner's claim of arbitrariness.

¶75

¶76

In light of the above, the Court fincls that the petitioner's exclusion from the selection list is unjustified and violative of Articles 14 ancl 16 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is accordingly allowed, and the respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's case for appointment to the post of School Assistant (Social Studies) in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations, taking into account the NCTE amendment dated 13.Lt.2o1g and the judgments in W.P.No.4055/2079 and W.A.No.511 of 201.9.

¶77

Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

¶78

That Rule Nisi has^{been made absolute as above'} Witness the Hon'ble^{the ActingChief Justice SUJOYPAUL' on this Tuesday} ,The^{EighteenthDay Of March Two Thousand And Twenty Five}

¶79

SDTT. TIRUMALA^DEVI I DEPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶80

//TRUE COPY//

¶81

¶82

To, 1 The Soecial Chief^{Secretary School Education(G} n ral Dr:partment) Secretariat, HYderabad

¶83