RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J.

( 1 ) BOTH Sri Anand Grover, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Bhaskar Benny, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for services, appearing on behalf of the respondents, agree that the writ petition itself be finally heard.

( 2 ) THE writ petition is filed against the order of the A. P. Administrative Tribunal, (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), in o. A. No. 4174 of 2004 dated 23. 2. 2005, wherein it was held that in view of Rule 13 of the rules, issued in G. O. Ms. No. 315 home Department dated 13. 10. 1999, read with Order 70 (3) of the A. P. Revised police manual prohibiting entry of persons, having hiv positive, into Government service, the action of the respondents in not sending the petitioner for training, on his provisional selection as a stipendiary trainee cadet sub- inspector, was legal and valid. Among the reliefs sought for in this writ petition, is for a declaration that Order 70. 3 of the revised A. P. Police Manual Part I, volume I, is in violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

( 3 ) FACTS, to the extent necessary for this writ petition, are that on 7. 12. 2003 a notification was issued calling for applications from eligible candidates for the post of stipendiary cadet trainee sub-inspectors of police (civil ). The petitioner, an armed reserve police constable, applied for the said post, since there was 14% reservation in favour of persons working in the police department. The petitioner qualified in the physical tests, completed the 5 km run within the stipulated 25 minutes and was thereafter permitted to appear in the written examination. Pursuant to the written examination held on 29. 2. 2004, the petitioner was provisionally selected as a sub-inspector of police. The 3rd respondent, vide letter dated 23. 6. 2004, directed the petitioner to be present, along with his certificates, on 24. 6. 2004, for verification and medical examination. Petitioner submits that he came to know later that he was not sent for training and was not appointed, as he had tested HIV sero positive, that he continues to perform his duties as an armed reserve police constable satisfactorily despite his hiv positive status and that he is fit to perform the duties assigned to a subinspector of police also. The petitioner, and another applicant, approached the A. P administrative Tribunal and filed O. A. Nos. 4174 and 4210 of 2004 respectively. Before the Tribunal, the respondents herein relied on Order 70 (3) of the A. P. Revised police Manual which requires candidates to undergo HIV test and renders persons with HIV positive ineligible for recruitment/ appointment. The A P. Police (Stipendiary cadet Trainee) Rules, made in exercise of the powers conferred under the proviso to article 309 of the Constitution of India, prescribe the qualifying standards for appointment in the police force. While several factors such as colour blindness, squint, morbid conditions of eye, knock knees etc. , are among the disqualifications, the rules do not prescribe HIV as a disqualification It is under Order 70 (3) of the Revised AP. Police Manual that this condition, of persons infected with HTV being rendered ineligible for appointment, is prescribed. Though the vires of Order 70 (3) of the A. P. Revised Police Manual was not under challenge before the Tribunal, the petitioner would seek a declaration from this court that Order 70 (3) is in violation of articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of india.

( 4 ) PETITIONER contends that a person, though found HIV sero positive, would be fit to perform normal functions for long durations throughout the asymptomatic period, and it is only in the last stage (known as AIDS) that a person may be unfit to perform the functions or duties in his/her employment.

( 5 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner a person s job not only provides him or her with daily sustenance but also helps to define his or her life and that most pe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document