Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The Ga And K Abhyudaya Jr. College, ... vs Prl. Secretary, Higher Education ... on 19 February, 2020
Author: T. Rajani
Bench: T. Rajani
SMT JUSTICE T.RAJANI
WRIT PETITION No. 13592 OF 2016
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in not approving the appointment of the 2nd petitioner as Junior Lecturer in English in the 1st petitioner college in pursuance of permission accorded by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings in Rc.No.Admn.1-3/5636/2002, dated 20.12.2002, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard.
3. The counsel for the petitioners submits that one R.Vijaya Raghava Chowdary was appointed as Correspondent to the 1st petitioner-college in the place of one K.V.Koteswaa Rao, based on the resolution passed by the Abhyudaya Academy of Educational Society in the month of January, 2009 and his appointment was approved by the 3rd respondent vide proceedings in Rc.No.Admn.IB- 1/460/2009, date 14.05.2009. He has been discharging his duties without any break or complaint. The 1st petitioner was admitted into grant in aid with effect from 16.04.1990. One P.Seshagiri Rao, aided junior lecturer in English, working in the 1st petitioner college was absconded from duty since 15.11.1993 and his services were terminated. Due to the said reason, one post of aided lecturer in English fell vacant. The 1st petitioner-College decided to appoint temporary staff in regular process. One Ch.Srikiran was appointed as part-time junior lecturer in English which was extended for one year 2 and later extended for another year. At that juncture, the said part-time junior lecturer approached the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh by filing W.P.No.13116 of 1999 seeking direction to the respondents to regularise her services in the post of aided Junior Lecturer in English in the 1st petitioner college. The Hon'ble Court by order, dated 29.06.1999, in WP MP No.16045 of 1999 granted interim direction directing the Commissioner and Director of Intermediate Education not to fill up the vacancy of Junior Lecturer in English from the outsider until further orders. Subsequently, the Government imposed ban on recruitment in private aided management institutions in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
The 2nd respondent took a policy decision to fill up the SC and ST backlog vacancies in the private aided management institutions in the State. The 2nd respondent accorded permission to the 1st petitioner college vide proceedings in Rc.No.Admn-1-3/5636/2002, dated 20.12.2002 i.e., the one aided lecturer post in English by following the procedure as contemplated in G.O.Ms.No.12, dated 19.01.1992 by following the rule of reservation. The post of Junior Lecturer in English was earmarked for SC (A) Women, Roster point No.2, and one post of aided attender was earmarked with SC(A) Women. In pursuance of the permission accorded by the 2nd respondent, vide proceedings dated 20.12.2002, the Management called for applications from the eligible candidates by way of publication, in response to which the 2nd petitioner has made an application along with others. Thereafter, staff selection committee was constituted. 3 A written examination and interview were conducted by the said committee. The 2nd petitioner was found eligible for appointment as Junior Lecturer in English. The 1st petitioner college issued appointment orders in her favour on 30.03.2003 subject to the outcome of the approval of the competent authority. The Regional Inspection Officer, Vjayawada submitted proposals by his letter, dated 10.03.2003, for approval of appointment. One C.Srikiran filed WP MP No.32264 of 2002 in WP No.16045 of 2002 seeking directions to the respondents to continue her in the post of Junior Lecturer in English against aided vacancy available in 1st petitioner college, as such directions were given. Later, the said orders were modified by orders dated 08.04.2003 directing the respondents to continue the petitioners therein, if they are in service as on the date of filing of the writ petition by paying the same emoluments and keeping it open for the respondents to proceed with the selection process and the same shall be subject to the result of the writ petition. The 2nd petitioner joined duty on 03.04.2003 and has been discharging her duties. The 2nd respondent approved the appointments of SC/ST backlog posts made under limited recruitment. For admission into grant in, orders were issued vide proceedings in Rc.No.Admn-1-3/537/2003, dated 25.03.2003 including the 1st petitioner college into grant in aid at serial No.3, only in respect of one K.Kamala, Attender and ignored the approval of appointment of the 2nd petitioner without assigning any reasons.
4. The counsel for the petitioners draws the attention of this court to the proceedings in Rc.No.044934/E1-2/2003-04, dated 14.10.2004, 4 by virtue of which the Secretary, Board of Intermediate Education, informed the Secretary, of the 1st petitioner college that the proposals for ratification of appointment of the 2nd petitioner were received and that the matter was examined in pursuance of the Rules governing and the following mistakes were found, which are as under:
"a) Orders were issued in G.O.Ms.No.12, Education, dated 10.01.92 to wait for sponsoring of candidates by the Employment Exchange for 15 days to give notification of vacancies in two daily newspapers, but the same was not adhered to by the management. The employment exchange was addressed on 23.12.2002 and notification in newspapers were given on2 7.12.2002 itself without waiting for the required period of 15 days. This is contrary to the instructions issued.
Further the selection was made in less than 15 days i.e., on 31.12.2002 itself (within 8 days of notifying the vacancy to the Employment Exchange) without waiting for response from Employment Exchange.
b) In the proceedings 1st cited, the District Vocational Education Officer, Eluru was nominated as Government representative in the selection committee. But the District Vocational Education Officer, Eluru has not attended the selection and instead Regional Joint Director of Intermediate Education, Rajahmundry, has attended the section committee which is not as per the instructions issued by the Commissioner & Director of Intermediate Education.
c) In the minutes of the selection committee it was recorded that as the candidates of SC 'A' (W) community were not available, SC 'B' (W) candidates were considered for the JL in English post. But the candidate selected belong to SC 'C' (2) community. Hence, proper information was not put before the 5 selection committee minutes and the minutes are not supporting the selection of the candidate correctly."
5. The counsel, with regard to the objection under clause (a) submits that the said objection was overruled by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad in W.A.No.1129 of 2014, wherein it was held that though employment exchange used to be the only source for sponsoring candidatures few years ago, for all practical purposes, the registration with the employment exchange has become redundant, wherever the procedure provides for issuance of notification. Once a notification is issued, not only those who get themselves registered with the employment exchange, but also others can apply. Hence, as rightly contended, the objection becomes meritless.
6. As regards, the 2nd objection, the respondents' counsel, though took time to get instructions, does not come forward with any supporting material for the said objection. As regards the 3rd objection under clause (c), the counsel submits that the same was done away by virtue of the Supreme Court Judgment, which is not disputed by the respondents' counsel.
7. The petitioners' counsel also draws the attention of this court to the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent, dated 26.02.2003, wherein the Secretary of the 1st petitioner-college was called upon to furnish information pertaining to the posts reserved for SC Woman and about the minutes of the Selection Committee, wherein it was mentioned that SC 'A' Woman candidates are not available, SC 'B' Woman candidates 6 are eligible. It was pointed out that the 2nd petitioner belongs to SC Category and the said discrepancy was sought to be explained.
8. He also draws the attention of this court to the letter issued by the Regional Inspection Officer, Board of Intermediate Education to the Secretary of Board of Intermediate Education, with regard to the appointment of the 2nd petitioner, stating that since no SC A & B candidates have attended the interview on 31.12.2002 and since the two candidates present belongs to SC C, the 2nd petitioner was considered for selection. It was requested to approve the candidature of the 2nd petitioner in the backlog of SC. It is also mentioned that the said vacancy was already approved and admitted into grant in aid.
9. In view of the above, this court holds the action of the respondents in not approving the appointment of 2nd petitioner as Junior Lecturer in pursuance of the permission accorded by the 2nd respondent, as illegal.
10. With the above observations, the writ petition is hereby allowed and the respondents shall approve the appointment of the 2nd petitioner as Junior Lecturer in English in the 1st petitioner college on par with Smt.K.Kamala, who was appointed by virtue of proceedings, dated 25.03.2003. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________ T. RAJANI, J February 19, 2020 LMV 7 JUSTICE T.RAJANI WRIT PETITION No. 13592 OF 2016 February 19, 2020 LMV