Eligibility for appointment must be proven by necessary documents on the date of notification, as established in judicial precedents.

ORDER :

GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J.

1. Heard Sri G.V. Shivaji, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner in W.P.Nos.20801 of 2022, Sri Tagore Yadav Yaragorla. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Dheera Kanishka, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners in W.P.Nos.21395 and 21416 of 2022, Sri G. Raja Babu, Learned Government Pleader for Village and Ward Secretariats and Sri Harinath Reddy Somagutta, Learned Standing Counsel for Dr. Y.S.R. Horticulture University.

2. The Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.20817 of 2022 and the present Writ Petitioners in these three Writ Petitions are all similarly situated. Even in the earlier round of litigation, the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.20817 of 2022 and the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.20801 of 2022 have jointly filed W.P.No.3167 of 2021. Similarly, the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.21416 of 2022 and W.P.No.21395 of 2022 have jointly filed W.P.No.16954 of 2020. Learned Single Judge of this Court, in the earlier round of litigation, was pleased to dispose of both the Writ Petitions (W.P.Nos.16954 of 2020 and 3167 of 2021) by a Common Order dated 13.04.2022 (Ex.P.11 in W.P.No.21416 of 2022), As all the four persons were aggrieved of the subsequent Proceedings of the Official Respondents, each person has filed a separate Writ Petition, wherein, the learned Single Judge of this Court was pleased to dispose of W.P.No.20817 of 2022 which is filed by one Sri Yennammalluri Mohammed Zakir Hussain vide Order dated 07.07.2023. This Court has perused the facts in the present Writ Petitions and it is of the opinion that the facts are similar in nature.

3. Admittedly, the result of the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.20801 of 2022 was declared by the evaluator on 30.12.2019, which is also countersigned by the Principal of the Evaluation Centre (pages 45 & 46 in W.P.No.20801 of 2022). Similarly, the result of the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.21395 of 2022 was declared by the evaluator on 06.01.2020, which is also countersigned by the Principal of the Horticulture Polytechnic on the same date (page 41 in W.P.No.21395 of 2022). Similarly, the result of the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.21416 of 2022 was declared by the evaluator on 06.01.2020, which is also countersigned by the Principal of the Horticulture Polytechnic, Kalikiri, Chittoor District on the same date (page 41 in W.P.No.21416 of 2022).

4. Learned Single Judge of this Court was pleased to dispose of W.P.No.20817 of 2022 by taking into consideration the ratio of the Judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dolly Chhanda vs. Chairman, JEE and Ors. : (2005) 9 SCC 799. In the said Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dolly Chhanda’s case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has also referred to another case titled as Charles K. Skaria Vs. Dr. C. Mathew : (1980) 2 SCC 752 . Para Nos.7 & 8 of the Order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dolly Chhanda’s case would squarely apply to the facts in the present Writ Petitions also. The Order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.20817 of 2022 dated 07.07.2023 has attained finality.

5. In this view of the matter, the above Writ Petitions V i t (W.P.Nos.20801, 21395 and 21416 of 2022) stand allowed in terms of the Order passed in W.P.No.20817 of 2022 dated 07.07.2023. No Order as to costs. However, having regard to the fact that the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.20817 of 2022 (Sri Yennammalluri Mohammed Zakir Hussain) who is similarly situated as that of the present Writ Petitioners had secured the Order on 07.07.2023, this Court is of the opinion that the present Writ Petitioners shall also be entitled for appointment from the date Sri Yennammalluri Mohamme