WP/34864/2023 of K.Jaya Laxmi Vs The State of Telangana on 29 December 2023

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ ol Mandamus declaringthat the petitioners are entitled to be treated on par with the candidatesthat the petitioners are entitled to be treated on par with the candidateswho were selected and appointed pursuant to DSC 2002 with allconsequential benefrts.consequential benefrts.

2. Heard Sri Srinivasa Rao Madiraju, learned counsel appearing forthe petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Services-1,appearing for respondent Nos.l to 6.

3. l,earned counsel for the petitioners submitted that therespondents have issued a Notifrcation for direct recruitment to post ofHindi Pandit ald others, and in pursuance of the same, the petitionershave submitted their applications and their names were shown in theprovisional list of selected candidates fior DSC 2002. However, theywere not given appointment but the persons whose names were shownalong with those of the petitioners were given appointment. On enquiry,it was informed that, since the petitioners have acquired certificatesfrom the Universities other than the ones in the erstwhile State ofAndhra Pradesh, their candidature was not considered and they werenot given appointment orders. It is further submitted that afterprolonged litigation, the Government has issued G.O.s and thepetitioners were appointed during the year 2006. However, the wp_34864_2023 \.

candidates, whose names were sho\ [/n ]along u,ith the names of [the]petitioners, were appointed immediately, but the appointment of thepetitioners was unduly delayed for no fault of them. It is furthersubmitted that the similarly situated candidates have approached [the]Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal [(for ]short, "the APAT"') [and]lrled O.A.No. 12O41 of 2O09 and batch which [was ]disposed [of ][uide ][order,]dated, 24.O8.2O 1O, directing the respondents therein to fix the [senioriry]of the applicants therein in the cadre of Language Pandit [(Hindi)/School]Assistant (Hindi) on par with the candidates appointed [in ][DSC 2002.]

4. It is further submitted that some other similarly situated [persons]have approached the APAT and filed O.A.No.6O73 of 2Ol1 seeking [the]same relief, and the szune was allowed uirle order, dated, [2O.O7.2O11,]holding that the applicants therein were entitled for [seniority ][in ][the]order of merit, on par with the candidates appointed in [DSC ][2OO2 ][and ][tt]was further held that they were entitled for monetary benehts [from ][the]date of their appointment only. It is. further submitted that [the]respondents have challenged the similar orders by way of [filing]W.P.Nos.14941, 32880 and 32882 of 2Ol4 before this Court and [the]same were dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court [uide ][order,]dated 13.O7.2O22, following the order, dated 29.06.2017, [passed ][by ][the]Coordinate Bench of this Court [in ][W.P.No.21 ][L93 ][of ][2017. ][It ][is ][further]submitted that the DSC [2OO2 ]candidates [have ]earlier [filed]W.P.No.33l7O of 2022 seeking notional [seniority ]on [par ][with ][the]

batchmates of DSC 2OO2 and this Court, uide order, [dated 23.08.2022,]permitted the petitioners therein to make a representation [and ][directed]the respondents to consider the same and fix [the ][seniority ][of ][the]petitioners on par with the DSC 2002 candidates. Therefore, [learned]counsel for the petitioners prayed this Court to [grant ][a ][similar ][relief to]the petitioners herein.

5. Learned Government Pleader for Services-I [submitted ]that [the]petitioners have not made any representations to [the ][Department ][and]therefore, their cases could not be [considered ][and ][further ][submitted]that the respondents will consider and dispose [of ][the ][representations ][of]the petitioner, as and when they are received by the [respondent]authorities.

6. Having regard to the rival contentions and also [the fact ][that ][the]issue is already considered by this Court in a number [of ][writ ][petitions]and the petitioners are similarly [placed ]as the [petitioners ][in ][those ][writ]petitions, this Court deems it fit and proper io [permit ]the [petitioners ][to]submit a representation to the respondent [authorities ][within ][a ][period ][of]two (O2) weeks from today. Upon receipt [of ][such ][representation ][from]the petitioners, the respondents are directed [to ][consider conferment of]seniority of the petitioners [on par ]with [the ][candidates ][who ][have ][been]seiected and appointed [pursuant ][to ]DSC [2OO2, ][rn ][the light ][of the orders]of this Court in W.P.No.21 193 of [2Ol7 ], dated [29-06.2077, ][and]W.P.Nos. L4947,32880 and 32882 of2Ol4, [dated ][13.O7.2O22, ][and ][pass]

Pi^

wp_348 2023

appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, within a period ofslx(06) weeks thereof and communicate a copy thereof to thepetitioners.

Accordingly, the Writ petition is disposed of.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition,shall stand closed. No costs.shall stand closed. No costs.

SD/-MOHD. SANAULLAH ANSARIASSISTANTGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

sEcTtoOFFICER

To,1. The Principal Secretary, School Education Department, State of Telangana,Dr.B.R.Ambekdar Telangana State Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The District Educational Officer, Nagarkurnool, Nagarkurnool District.

Conclusion

3. The District Educational Officer, , Nagarkurnool, Nagarkurnool District.4. The District Educational Officer, Jogulamba Gadwal, Jogulamba GadwalDiskict.5. The District Educational Officer, Vikarabad, Vikarabad District.7. 6. One CC The District Educational Officer, to Sri Srinivasa Rao Madiraju , Ranga Advocate Reddy, Ranga Reddy Diskict.[OPUC]

[OPUC]8. Two CCs to GP For Services, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

9. Two CD Copies

MBC ^Bs r$.------

q

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2911212023

It\e [STArA]qf,J[\ [?[?[]ooIgt*Ds5pP.r [Cfl]ORDER

WP.No.34864 ot 2023

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITIONWITHOUT COSTS