Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
The Principal, The Besant Theosophical ... vs S. Jahanara Begum And Ors. on 19 June, 1990
Equivalent citations: 1992(1)ALT161
JUDGMENT K. Amareswari, J.
1. First respondent was appointed as a part-time lecturer in Hindi in the appellant college at Madanapally on August 6, 1981 on payment of remuneration on hourly basis. While she was working as part-time lecturer, the management of the appellant College issued an advertisement, published in the daily newspaper 'Andhra Patrika' dated April 30, 1983 calling for applications for filling-up the posts of lecturers on a regular basis in various subjects, such as English, Telugu, Hindi, History, Political Science, Commerce, Horticulture, Botany etc. The petitioner had applied for the post of lecturer in Hindi, She was called for interview on July 9, 1983 by the selection committee. Her case is that she was selected and placed at No. 1 in the selection list, but inspite of the same she was not appointed by the management. She made a representation on March 31, 1984 to the Director of Higher Education, third respondent herein, bringing the above facts to his notice and requesting him to issue necessary directions to the appellant college herein to absorb her as lecturer in Hindi on a permanent basis consequent to her selection. Subsequently, she had submitted another representation on December 1, 1987 to the Deputy Director of Higher Education, Saifabad. Hyderabad. As she was not appointed on a regular basis, she filed the writ petition on December 18, 1987, out of which this appeal arises, seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the management and other authorities to absorb her as Hindi lecturer in a regular vacancy with effect from July 9,1983.
2. Counter-affidavits have been filed by the appellant and third respondent herein in the writ petition. The fact that the first respondent was selected as a lecturer in Hindi on her application submitted pursuant to the advertisement issued in terms of G.O.Ms. No. 905 dated September 21, 1976 is not denied. Second respondent in the writ petition had merely stated that the first respondent was not selected as a lecturer in Hindi on a regular basis in terms of G.O. referred to above. The appellant herein had not produced the record before the learned single Judge in spite of time being granted. Except a vague statement that the first respondent was not selected as a lecturer in Hindi, no records were produced. On behalf of the first respondent, her representation dt. March 31, 1984 submitted to the Director of Higher Education, Hyderabad and the representation dated December 1, 1987 submitted to the Deputy Director of Higher Education, Saifabad, Hyderabad have been filed. In the said representations, it was categorically mentioned that she was interviewed on July 9, 1983 by the selection committee and she was placed in serial No. 1 in the selection list. The learned single Judge proceeded with the matter on the basis of the material on record and allowed the writ petition on the ground that eventhough the first respondent herein appeared for the interview and was selected and placed at Serial No. 1 in the selection list, she was not appointed. Aggrieved by this order, the management has now come up in appeal. Even in this writ appeal, no records were produced by the appellant College. Only the minutes of the meetings have been produced before us. The minutes show that even part-time lecturers were interviewed for the post of lecturer in Hindi and the first respondent, Jahanara Begum was placed at serial No. 1. The fact that she appeared for the interview on July 9, 1983 is beyond doubt. The advertisement published in daily newspaper mentioned supra was calling for applications for filling-up the posts in regular vacancies. The first respondent, who was working on part-time basis, applied for the post of Hindi lecturer pursuant to the said advertisement. On the basis of her application, she was called for interview to be held on July 9, 1983. The proceedings show that she appeared for the interview. The learned counsel for the first respondent has placed before us a communication dated February 2,1985 which emanated from the College to the Director of Higher Education, to the effect that the first respondent appeared before the selection committee and placed in the panel of part-time lecturers and that the management recommends that she may be considered for the vacancy of the post of lecturer. When once a candidate appeared for the interview before the properly constituted selection committee and was placed at serial No. 1 in the selection list, the said candidate is entitled to be appointed as a lecturer on a regular basis.
3. In D.G. Krishnamacharyulu and Ors. v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Ors., 1988 (2) ALT 237, Justice P.A. Choudary, as he then was, held that "When lecturers were selected following the procedure of selection laid down in G.O. Ms.905 dated September 21, 1976, the posts shall be deemed to have been regularly filled up."
In a subsequent decision rendered by another single Judge in Writ Petition No. 9629 of 1982 dated December 10, 1987, it was held that "When a candidate was selection by the duly constituted Selected Committee after due interview conducted pursuant to the advertisement issued by the authority and continued in service, such a person must be taken to have been appointed on a permanent basis."
To the same affect is the view expressed in Mrs. L. Sarojini v. The Special Officer and Principal, College of Arts & Science, Kamareddy, 1988 (2) APLJ dt. 13-7-1988 = 1988 (2) ALT 577 in Writ Petition No. 5046 of 1986 dated 21-6-1988.
4. In view of the legal principle enunciated in the above decisions) we have no hesitation in holding that the first respondent must be deemed to have been selected on a regular basis and she is entitled to be appointed as a lecturer.
5. It is submitted by Sri Suryanarayanamurthy, learned counsel for the College that the evening session was abolished with effect from 30-3-1988 and any direction to appoint the first respondent as a lecturer on a regular basis would be futile. By G.O-Ms. No. 436 dated 14-10-1988, under which the evening sessions of the College were abolished, the Government directed that the existing evening Colleges shall be free to convert evening Colleges/ Courses in the day College by starting second shift and the services of the lecturers in the evening colleges have to be adjusted by the Director of Higher Education in the other vacancies of the same College or other private Colleges wherever vacancies arise.
6. It is represented by the learned counsel for the first respondent before us that the appellant - College had started second shift in the day sessions pursuant to the order of the Director of Higher Education dated 21-11-1988.
7. In those circumstances, we do not see any good ground for interference with the order of the learned single Judge. The first respondent shall be deemed to have been appointed on regular basis as a lecturer from July 9, 1983 and she is entitled to all other consequential benefits which flow therefrom. The first respondent shall be taken into service with immediate effect.
8. With the above directions, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.