Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Abhilashbhimarasetty vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 17 December, 2021
Author: Ninala Jayasurya
Bench: Ninala Jayasurya
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT PETITION No. 18431 of 2021
ORDER:-
The writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the petitioner under Reservation to Meritorious Sports Category as per Clause 4.4 and 4.9 of the Notification No.27/2018 dated 31.12.2018 and not calling/selecting the petitioner for oral interview for recruitment to the posts falling under Group-I Services as illegal, unreasonable etc., and also violative of Rule 2 (19) of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules 1996 (for short 'the Rules) and also amounts to violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
2. Heard Smt. G.Jhansi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the 1st respondent and Mr.N.A.Ramachandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.
3. The relevant facts of the case are as follows:
The petitioner represented State of Pondicherry in the 57th Senior Men's National Boxing Championship organized by Delhi Amateur Boxing Association, Indian Boxing Federation.
4. Pursuant to Notification No.27/2018 dated 31.12.2018 (General Recruitment) inviting applications through online for recruitment to the posts falling under Group-I services for a total 2 NJS,J W.P.No.18431 of 2021 of 44 carry forward vacancies and 125 fresh vacancies, the petitioner being well qualified, applied for the said posts under Sports Quota. The recruitment process comprises of three stages viz., 1) Preliminary Examination (objective type), 2) Mains Examination (conventional type) and 3) Interview.
5. In the Preliminary Examination, conducted on 26.05.2019, the petitioner has scored 114.67 marks, while the cut off mark is 90.42. Subsequently, the Mains Examination was conducted and the results were declared on 28.04.2021, wherein the petitioner was provisionally qualified under Sports Quota and thereafter vide e-mail dated 29-04-2021 he was directed to produce the relevant Form-I Certificate, which forms Part of Annexure-III of G.O.Ms.No.74, Youth Advancement, Tourism & Culture (Sports) Department, dated 09.08.2012 relating to Group-I Services, within 48 hours, so that the same can be forwarded to the Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh (SAAP) for verification of their Sport Certificates.
6. G.O.Ms.No.74 provides for 29 recognized sports disciplines as contained in Annexure-I. Annexure-II specifies the priorities for recruitment on 2% reservations, which starts with a Gold Medal in Olympics Games at Item No.1 and ends with the participation in State/Inter-District Championship for School Games at Item 90.
7. The petitioner as per the directions of the 2nd respondent uploaded the Sports Certificates. However, through the interviews 3 NJS,J W.P.No.18431 of 2021 schedule cum certificate verification notification issued on 02.06.2021 to the petitioner's dismay, it was declared as follows:
"On detailed examination of sports certificates produced by the individuals, it is noticed that no candidate has participated in the Sports/Games either at International or Multinational level and accordingly not eligible for consideration to the post of Group-I Services. The candidature as such is liable for rejection as per the terms and conditions of the Notification and is therefore hereby rejected for the post of Group-I Services. All the Provisional admissions to Interview under sports category stand cancelled and in this regard individual memos will be sent to each candidate."
8. In view of the above position and under the guise that the petitioner had not participated in Sports/Games either at International or Multinational level, the petitioner was not called for the interview. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.
9. Smt.G.Jhansi, learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submitted that in the Notification, there is no mention that only those candidates who participated in the Sports/Games either at International or Multi National level are eligible under Sports Quota for Group-I Posts. While referring to the relevant portion of Group-I Notification, dated 31.12.2018 which provides for Sports Reservation, she would submit that meritorious sportsman, means a sports person who had represented the State or Country in a 4 NJS,J W.P.No.18431 of 2021 National or International competition or Universities in the Inter- University Tournaments conducted by the Inter University Boards or the State School Team in the National Sports/Games for schools conducted by the All India School Games Federation in any of the Games, Sports, mentioned therein and any other Games/Sports as specified by the Government from time to time, in terms of the Rule 2 (19) of the Rules. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is a meritorious sports person falling within the definition of meritorious sportsman as per Clause 2.19 of the Rules, since he represented the State of Pondicherry in the 57th Senior Men's National Boxing Championship and other events at various levels.
10. Rule 2 (19) of the Rules reads thus :
2(19) Meritorious Sportsman: - "Meritorious Sportsman" - means a sportsman who has represented the State or the Country in a national or international competition or Universities in the Inter-University tournaments conducted by the Inter-University Boards or the State School team in the national sports/games/for schools conducted by the All India School Games Federation in any of the games, sports, mentioned below; and any other games/sports as may be a specified by the Government from time to time".
11. Learned counsel while emphasizing that there is no dispute that the petitioner falls under the category of meritorious sportsman/woman and participated in the sports conducted at the All India level, would contend that in the absence of a specific 5 NJS,J W.P.No.18431 of 2021 mention in the Notification that only candidates who participated in an International or Multinational competition would be eligible for Group-I, the stipulation of participation in an international or multinational competition as mentioned in Form-I to the Notification would be of no consequence. The learned counsel further submits that the criteria as set out in the G.O., referred to above cannot be curtailed or restricted by the Form and any such act on the part of the 2nd respondent contrary to the same amounts to arbitrary exercise of power and violation of the petitioner's rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. The learned counsel also submits that similar issues fell for consideration by this Court in W.P.No.11057 of 2021 and the matter is squarely covered by the judgment in the said writ petition dated 29.07.2021. Accordingly, she urges that the writ petition may be allowed as prayed for.
12. Mr. N.A.Ramachandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent/Commission while referring to the contentions raised in the counter-affidavit supported the impugned proceedings. He submits that Forms-I to IV are part of G.O.Ms.No.74 and therefore, as per the conditions stipulated in Form-I, the candidate who has participated in international competition or multinational competition alone is eligible for Group-I posts under Sports Quota. However, he has not disputed consideration of similar issues in the judgment dated 29.07.2021 6 NJS,J W.P.No.18431 of 2021 as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner or that the petitioner is not a sports personality.
13. In the light of the submissions made by the respective counsel, this Court has carefully gone through the relevant material placed on record, the judgment of the learned Single Judge on which strong reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
14. In W.P.No.11057 of 2021, the learned Judge dealt with the very same Notification dated 31.12.2018. The case of the petitioner therein was rejected by a communication dated 31.05.2021 on the ground that he has not represented India in an international/multinational competition as prescribed in Form-I of Annexure-III. The learned Judge after detailed consideration of the matter, allowed the writ petition while rejecting the contentions advanced on behalf of the 2nd respondent/commission. Relying on various legal precedents of the Hon'ble Supreme Court to the effect that the Form cannot control the Act, Rules or Directions, the learned Judge held that what is printed in a Form appended to the G.O., which is merely referred to in the Advertisement/Notification cannot be used to deny the post to the petitioner, in the absence of specific mention (in the notification or G.O.) that only people who participated in an International or Multinational competition would be eligible for Group-I. The learned Judge also emphasized that it cannot be said that the Form will prevail over the content of the 7 NJS,J W.P.No.18431 of 2021 Advertisement/Notification or the Government Order. The learned Judge accordingly, allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents therein to consider the case of the petitioner under meritorious Sports Category for the 44 carry forward posts and 125 vacancies.
15. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the said judgment applies on all fours to the issue involved in the present writ petition and therefore the same deserves to be allowed for the reasons alike. Hence, the contentions advanced on behalf of the learned Standing Counsel are rejected.
16. However, it is pertinent to refer to one relevant aspect with reference to the Notification No.27 of 2018 dated 31.12.2018. Some of the candidates who applied for Group-I Posts, filed W.P.No.11000 of 2021 and batch calling in question the conduct of Mains Examination and evaluation of answer scripts by digital evaluation. After detailed consideration of the matter, the learned Judge by order dated 01.10.2021, partly allowed the writ petitions and directed the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission(APPSC) to get all the answer scripts of the Mains examination of Notification No.27 of 2018 dated 31.12.2018 evaluated manually by the conventional method and within the time line stipulated in the order. It is a matter of record that against the said judgment of the learned Single Judge, a batch of 8 NJS,J W.P.No.18431 of 2021 Writ Appeals have been preferred and the same are pending adjudication.
17. Though the petitioner is entitled for consideration of his case under Sports Quota, in the light of the judgment of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.11057 of 2021 which is squarely applicable to the petitioner, and in view of the conclusions arrived at supra, the subsequent developments are also required to be taken note of.
18. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for the 44 carry forward posts and 125 vacancies, however, subject to the result of the manual evaluation of answer scripts of Mains Examination as directed vide common order dated 01.10.2021 in W.P.No.11000 of 2021 & batch / outcome of the W.As filed against the said order.
19. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with the above observations. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this appeal shall stand dismissed.
__________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J 17.12.2021.
BLV 9 NJS,J W.P.No.18431 of 2021 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA W.P.No.18431 of 2021 Dated 17.12.2021 BLV