Sola Srinath vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(AP) 502

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
V. Sujatha, J.
Sola Srinath – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
Writ Petition No.15638 of 2019
Decided On : 14-11-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : P.S.P. Suresh Kumar.

Headnote:
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226, 309, 162, 14, 19(1) (g), 21 - A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 - Rule 2 (19) - Empowers all the High Courts of India to issue the writs- Recruitment and conditions of service of persons serving the Union or a State - Extent of executive power of State Subject to the provisions of this Constitution - provides Right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business to all citizens subject to Art - Protection of Life and Personal Liberty -Whether respondents can go for selection beyond scope of notification by way of a corrigendum or not –Held, This Court, respondents are bound to follow selection process as per notification, but not as per subsequent corrigendum or subsequent G.Os. issued by Government - Said corrigendum or G.O. referred by respondents would apply only to appointments made subsequently, but not to candidates, who applied in pursuance of notification - It is an admitted fact that once selection process has commenced, respondents are bound to follow procedure as contemplated in notification and cannot go for selection process in pursuance of corrigendum or G.O - Therefore, respondent’s contention that selection process has already been completed, is absolutely wrong –Ordered Accordingly.

ORDER :

1. The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“to issue any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.2, in not including the name of the Petitioner in the final selection list under the Meritorious Sports Person, MSP-1 category, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Principles of Natural Justice, violation of Articles 14, 19 (1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the Respondents to give posting orders to the Petitioner as Constable as per the Recruitment Notification dated 12/11/2018 and pass such other orders”.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has completed Master of Pharmacy (Pharmaceutical Analysis) in the year 2017 and along with his studies, he also participated in Kabbaddi sports in local, State level and also International competitions. The petitioner participated in 3rd Students Olympic International Games, 2016-2017 at Colombo, Sri Lanka and he secured Runner position in the said competitions. In pursuance of the recruitment notification dated 12.11.2018 for recruitment of Police Constables, the petitioner applied for the said post under sports quota. Thereafter, the petitioner attended the written examination on 17.03.2019 and he got qualified in the said examination by securing 79 marks.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of being qualified in the said examination, the petitioner’s name was not shown in the final selection list dated 13.09.2019.

4. The specific case of the petitioner is that in the recruitment notification dated 12.11.2018, it is specifically stated that there are three categories i.e. MSP-1, MSP-2 and MSP-3 which means Meritorious Sports Persons and the petitioner having participated in the Kabbaddi International competitions, falls under category-I as this category is meant for the persons, who participated in the International competitions, category-2 is for the persons, who participated in the National level and at the All India Inter University tournaments and All India School games and category-3 is for the persons, who participated in Zonal Inter University tournaments.

5. It is the further case of the petitioner that though the petitioner possessed the requisite qualification and is qualified by securing 79 marks and also falls under category-1 i.e. MSP-1, instead of considering the case of the petitioner, the candidates falling under categories 2 and 3 i.e. MSP-2 and MSP-3 were considered. Challenging the said action of the respondents, the present writ petition is filed.

6. When the writ petition came up for admission on 14.10.2019, this Court passed the following interim order:-

“….. one post shall be reserved for the petitioner.”

7. The 2nd respondent filed counter along with the vacate stay application and furnished the procedure for Meritorious Sports Persons as laid down in para 20(B) of the notification as follows:

i) MSP (Meritorious Sports Person) – Persons who satisfy the definition in Rule 2 (19) of A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 and who possess the necessary certificate issued by the competent authority as on the date of notification will come under this special category. This special category is sub-divided as below:

Category- 1) Persons who won medals or who participated in games/sports at the International level.

Category- 2) Persons who won medals or who participated in games/sports at the National level and at the All India Inter University tournaments and All India School Games.

Category- 3) Persons who won medals or who participated in games/sports in Zonal Inter University tournaments.

Persons who come under category (1) above will be preferred initially to fill the vacancies under Meritorious Sports Person special category. If sufficient candidates are not available, then the candidates from category (2) and thereafter from category (3) wi