Scribd
Upload
47 views8 pages

Andhra Pradesh High Court Writ Petition 2025

The document is a court order regarding Writ Petition No. 7098 of 2025, where petitioners challenge the legality of a recruitment notification for Deputy Educational Officers in Andhra Pradesh, claiming it violates constitutional provisions and previous court rulings. The court has allowed the recruitment process to continue but has prohibited the declaration of results until the next hearing. The respondents are instructed to file a counter within two weeks, with the case set for review in four weeks.

Uploaded by

masabattulavenkatapradeep
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
47 views8 pages

Andhra Pradesh High Court Writ Petition 2025

The document is a court order regarding Writ Petition No. 7098 of 2025, where petitioners challenge the legality of a recruitment notification for Deputy Educational Officers in Andhra Pradesh, claiming it violates constitutional provisions and previous court rulings. The court has allowed the recruitment process to continue but has prohibited the declaration of results until the next hearing. The respondents are instructed to file a counter within two weeks, with the case set for review in four weeks.

Uploaded by

masabattulavenkatapradeep
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

lN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

.-PRESENT.I
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN

WRIT PETITION NO.I 7098 OF 2025


Between.-

1 BallJalapallI Upendra, s/o BallJlaPalII Naraslmhappa, aged about 33

years, occ-school Assistant, H.T. No. 14120120, Quallfled Pre'jms, I/o.


Kottabayanapalll vIIlage, Gorautla MandaI, sn sathya saI DIStrlct,
Andhra pradesh-515231.

2 Varadhlreddy venkata Lakshml sarayu Reddy, d/o- venka[a Janardhan


Reddy, aged about 25 years, occ-un-Employee, H T No 14110362,
Quallfiled Prellms, I/o H No 2/153B, U RaJuPalem Vlllage, vN PaIII
Mandal, ysR Kadapa DI'Strjct, Andhra pradesh.

3 Fayaz sayed, s/o. N J. LIyakhat All Saheb, aged about 49 years, occ-
SGT, HT No 14040094, Quallfied prellms, I/o c-3, sudarshan
Apartments, A.V. Apparaa Road, Rajahmundry, Andhra pradesh

4. YannagantI' Akh,'l sharath, s/o yannagantl oba,ah, aged about 28

yNeoa.r: I_2OoC5C:JU2::ET=oP::y£:,=: H::_: _NLO...14;£*::lo ,v=ua£I:il=da=:eon mash,Or:to. 2H€


No. 1-205-J28, Thothavarl street, Markapur, prakasam Dlstrlct, Andhra
Pradesh.

5 GS chakravathI, s/o Sangeeva Rao, aged about 51 years, occ-


sNCeha:o=oAusitsI:te==at==nTch I: OA:i4+0.3^ri^4:i;:v:?tagQeuuah=eDdOu= re5I:mys=:lroS I 1O_C9C8 ,
Near court yellamanchlll', Anakapalle Djstrl'ct, Andhra pradesh.
6. Vinjamurl' puma chandrasekhar Rao, s/o. Sambasiva Rao, aged about
+

48 years, occ-Grade-ll Head Master, H.T. No. 14060535, Not


Qualified Prelims, r/o. D. No- 5-349, Salivahanapeta, Mangalagiri,
Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

7. Sivakavi Prasanna Kumari, d/o. Mallikajuna Rao, w/o. Sasidhar, aged


. about 46 years, occ-SGT, H.T, No. 14080714, Not Qualified Prelims,

r/o. D. No. 22-1-28-3, Balaramayya Thota, 2nd Line, Kovum Road,


Kaudukuru, Prakasam District, Andhra Pradesh.

8. Mupparistty Parvathi, s/o. Hanumantha Rao, aged abo'ut 36 years, occ-


Private School Teacher, H.`T. No.14072190, Not Quall|fied Prelims, r/o.

M6ther Theresa English High School, Muthyalampadu Road, Dachepalli


Post Mandal, Palnadu District, Andhra Pradesh.

9. Madri Rajanna, s/o. Madri Prasangi, aged about 32 years, occ- SGT,
H.T. No.14131236, Not Qualified Prell®ms, r/o. [Link].12/189, Near, M.B.

Church, Yemmiganur, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh.

10. NagulapaIIi T. V. Gurumurthy, s/o. Radhakrishna Rao, aged

about 41 years, occ-SGT, H.T. No. 14020391, Qualified Prelims, r/o. H.

No. 1-15, BC Colony, Polayavalasa, Thettagj Post, Gurla MandaI,


Vizianagaram, Andhra Pradesh.

... Petitioner

AND

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Chief Secretary, General


Administration Department (Services), Secretariat Buildings,
Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur Dl'strict.

2. Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, Rep. by its Secretary, R


and B Building, M.G. Road Vijayawada, Krishna District, Andhra

Pradesh.

... Respondents
lIIIlllllllllllllll-

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the
Jr,

circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be

pleased to issue a writ, direction or order more particularly one in the nature of
writ of Mandamus, declaring the 'action of the respondent No.2 issuing the
notification No.14 of 2023 dated-22.12.2023 for direct recruitment to the posts

of Deputy Educational Officer in A.P. Educational Service (General


Recruitment) for being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14,15 and 16 of

the Constitution of India, against the judgments of the Honble Supreme Court
in R.K. Sabharval and others v. State of Punjab and others reported in (1995)
2 SCC 745, Rajesh Kumar Daria v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
reported in (2007) 8 SCC 785, and other judgments including the judgment of
the Honble High Court in W.P. Nd.11727 of 2022 dated 28.04.2023, and

unconstitutional and consequently rdirect the respondents to issue a fresh


notification for direct recruitment to the posts of Deputy Educational Officer in
A.P. Educational Service (General Recruitment) fixing the roster for
reservations in accordance with the judgments of the Honble Supreme Court
in R.K. Sabharval and others v. State of Punjab and others reported in (1995)
2 SCC 745, Rajesh Kumar Daria v. Rajasthan Public Service Commission,
reported in (2007) 8 SCC 785, and other judgments including the judgment of
the Hon'ble High Court in W.P. No. 11727 of 2022 dated 28.04.2023.

IANO: 1 OF2O25

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances


stated in the affidavit filed in suppch of the petition, the High Court may be

pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to Notification No. 14 of 2023


dated 22.12.2023 for direct recruitment to the posts of Deputy Educational
Officer in A.P. Educational Service (General Recruitment) for not fixing the
roster for reservations in accordance with Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in R.K. Sabharval and others v. State of Punjab and others reported in

(1995) 2 see 745, Rajesh Kumar Daria v. Rajasthan Public Service


Commission, reported in (2007) 8 SCC 785, and other judgments including
The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Petition and the

affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments Of Sri
srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, Advocate for the Petitioners, GP for Services-I, for
the Respondent No.1 and of Sri Seena Kumar, Standing Counsel for
respondent No.2 , the Court made the following

ORDER:

f[Learned Government PIeader for Services-I takes notice for

respondent No.1.

sri seena Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner Submits that the notification


No.14 of 2O23 dated 22.12.2023, by which, recruitment to the Post Of
Deputy Educational Officer is undertaken in clause 4.2 specifies that
reservation to women shall be provided horizontally to an extent of 33
1/3% in terms of Rule 22, 22(A) a 22(B) of the Andhra Pradesh State and
subordinate service Rules, 1996, as amended v,-de [Link].77, GA
(ser-D) Dept., dated 02.08.2023. Further, in Annexure-I, the vacancy
position as notified for the post of Deputy Educational Officer as against
total number of posts of 38, women candidates have been reServeCl
under horizontal reservation for 16 posts, which is almost 48O/a of total
posts, being notified. Besides, he would also submit that amendment tO
Rule 22 vide G.O|[Link].77, `GA (Ser-D) DeptI, dated 02.08.2023
specifically provided that, no roster point shall be earmarked to women
besides other categories for implementation of horizontal reservation.
contrary to the same, in Annexure-I, respondent No.2 has provided
roster points to women. He would also refer to orders Passed in
W-P,No.11727 of 2022, which
r/
considered challenge to the notification
issued by very same agency for the post of Assistant Conservator of
Forest, wherein fixation of roster points for horizontal reservation has
been held to be bad in law and t'he notification so issued came to be Set
aside. Even in the present notification by providing horizontal
reservation and roster points to the women, petitioners who belong to
general category and the othe+ 'male candidates gets eliminated and
deprived of their right to seek appointment, hence prayed to stay the
notification.

Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 on instructions


submits that the notification issued is strictly in tune with the COnditiOnS
laid down in [Link].77 dated 02.08.2023 and that since the main
examinations are slated to be scheduled on 26.03.2025 and 27.03-2025
the entire process is settled, so at this eleventh hour the petitioners
cannot seek any interim order staying ongoing process and would file
detailed counter. Opposing passing any interim orders, he placed On
record the orders passed in [Link].659 of 2023 & batch by Which the
final orders in [Link].11727 of 2022 have been stayed.

A plain reading of the notification impugned in the writ petitl-on at


clause 4.2 clearly specifies that women have been extended reservation (

to an extent of 33 1/3yo in terms of Rule 22 as amended, the Annexure-I


to the said notification provided for roster points besides notifying 16
out of 38 posts to them|

Pr,-ma fac,-e, Rule 22(A)(5) p+ohibits assignment of roster points for


horizontal reservations for women and the same has also been
considered by co-ordinate bench of this Court in [Link].11727 of 2022
following the ratio laid down in [Link]/a/,- Bhasftar Rec'dy and Others
vs. sfafe of Andhra pradeshJ whI-Ch held that provl'dl-ng such roster
points would clearly eljmI-hate and deprive the rights of other applicants.

This court bet-ng conscI-OuS Of the fact that petl-t[-oners since have
approached I-n the eleventh hour rand that many candidates have already
prepared for attendI-ng final examinatl-on, staying the examinatI-On and
further proceedl-ngs at thf-s stage would be detrI-mental I-n the larger
E____\|

I-nterest.

ln vl-ew of the above circumstances, the respondents are directed


to proceed with conducting final examl-natI-OnS SCheduled on 26.O3.2O25
& 27.O3.2O25, however, results sha" not be declared till next date of
hearing.

Let counter be fifed wI-thin two (02) weeks, reply jf any, be filed in
two (02) weeks thereafter.

List the matter after four (o4) weeks."


A

sd/- [Link] RAO


DEPUTY, REf][Link] D
A,
..dn
//TRUE COPY// ErJTION OFF CER

For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR


Tot
1. The Chief secretary, General Adminl'stration Department (services),
secretariat Buildl'ngs, velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District, state of
Andhra pradesh. (BY SPECIAL MESSENGER)
2. The Secretary, Andhra pradesh pub'l-c servI'Ce Comml'ssion, R and B
Building, M.G. Road Vijayawada, Krishna Dl'strict, Andhra pradesh. (By
RPAD)
3. One CC to SrI-Srinivasa Rao Bodduluri, Advocate [opuc]
4. One CC to srI- Seena [Link], standl-ng counse [opuc]
5. Two CCs to GP for servICeS-I, High Court ofAndhra pradesh. [ouT]
6. One spare copy
a > co a)

12021 (2) ALT 353


I/
I

HIGH COURT

CGR,J

DATED:19/03/2025

LIST THE MATTER AFTER FOUR (04) WEEKS

ORDER

[Link].7098 of 2025

DIRECTION i+-=f.'±±`^

iif/Sfl,SS,

Common questions

Powered by AI

The recruitment notification issued by the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission is alleged to violate Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution of India. These articles pertain to the right to equality and prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth, and equality of opportunity in matters of public employment .

The petitioner argued that the provision of 33 1/3% reservation to women under the amended rules, specifically Rule 22 amended by G.O.Ms.No.77, creates a conflict as it specifies no roster points should be earmarked for women besides other categories. However, the current notification assigns such roster points, which the petitioner argues is illegal and deprives applicants from other categories of their rights to seek appointment .

Rule 22 as amended allegedly conflicts with the petitioners' right concerning the roster system by prohibiting specific roster point assignments for horizontal reservation categories, yet the present notification violates this by assigning roster points for women. This potentially restricts fair competition and impacts the petitioners' opportunities within certain reserved categories, leading to their claim of rights deprivation .

The rule amendment in G.O.Ms.No.77 dated 02.08.2023, which prohibits assigning roster points under horizontal reservation, creates an issue in the notification. Contrary to the amendment, the notification assigns roster points for women, which the petitioners argue is illegal and contrary to established rules and judicial precedents. This conflict underpins the petition seeking a stay on the recruitment process .

Withholding recruitment examination results can ensure that any legal issues are resolved prior to further employment decisions, maintaining procedural fairness and adherence to rules. However, it may also cause delays in the recruitment process, affecting administrative efficiency and candidate expectations. The court's decision aims to balance immediate procedural continuity with the need to address alleged legal deficiencies .

W.P. No. 11727 of 2022 is significant as it serves as a precedent for the current writ petition. In that case, the court addressed similar issues of roster point assignments in notifications by the same agency, ruling them to be contrary to law and setting aside the notification. This ruling is used by the petitioners in the current case to argue against the legality of the current recruitment notification's provisions .

The court decided not to stay the recruitment examinations to avoid disrupting the process at the last minute, given that many candidates were already prepared for the examinations, which are scheduled shortly. This decision reflects the court's consideration of practical consequences and fairness to all stakeholders, ensuring continuity while addressing legal questions post-exam .

The horizontal reservation provided in the notification conflicts with the Supreme Court's ruling in R.K. Sabharwal and others v. State of Punjab and others, which guides the fixing of the roster and reservation points. According to the petitioners, the notification unlawfully assigns roster points for women under horizontal reservation, which violates the principles set forth in the Supreme Court's rulings that aim to ensure fair access to employment opportunities across different categories without eliminating the rights of other candidates .

The court directed that the ongoing recruitment examinations scheduled for March 26 and 27, 2025, should proceed as planned, but the declaration of results should be withheld until the next date of hearing. This ensures the process continues while the legal issues are being resolved, balancing the interests of the petitioners and other candidates involved .

The final order in W.P. No. 11727 of 2022 was stayed by W.A. No. 659 of 2023, which affects the current case by altering the direct applicability of its rulings as precedents since the order is not currently in effect. This stay creates an uncertainty in the legal grounding of the petitioners' arguments and is used by the respondents to oppose interim orders against the recruitment process in question .

You might also like