ORDER :

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services II.

2. This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus to declare the Memo No.108/E2/2016, dated 28.05.2018 issued by respondent no.2 as arbitrary, illegal and quash or set aside the same and to declare the action of the respondents in regularizing the services of the Petitioner w.e.f. 23.03.2017 instead of regularizing from 07.06.2007 as arbitrary, illegal and contrary to Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Rules, 1998 apart from being violative of the rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner w.e.f 07.06.2007 and grant all consequential benefits like seniority, promotion and increments including arrears of salary on account of such refixation.

3. The case of the Petitioner, in brief, is as following:

a) Petitioner has acquired Diploma in Commercial and Computer Practice inclusive of Typewriting English (Higher) and Typewriting Telugu (Lower) from State Board of Technical Education and Training from Sanjay Gandhi Government Polytechnic College, Adilabad in the year 1999 which is equivalent to Intermediate qualification.

b) Petitioner belongs to Schedule Caste Community and has responded to a notification bearing No. A2/643/2007 dated 01.03.2007 issued by the Respondent No. 4 for the recruitment of eligible backlog vacancies meant for SC and ST categories. This is to be made based on marks obtained in the qualifying academic examination by waiving written examination and interview.

c) Petitioner had been appointed as Typist by the Respondent No. 4 by the proceeding no. A2/643/2007-10 dated 28.04.2007 subject to passing of telugu typewriting (Higher) test within the period of probation. The petitioner joined the service on 07.06.2007 in the pursuance of the proceedings of the 3rd Respondent dated 01.06.2007.

d) Petitioner was directed to discharge services in the Head of Department at Hyderabad w.e.f 14.03.2012. Petitioner made a representation on 01.09.2014, that the petitioner had fractured her left hand in 2009 is unable to pass the test and that the petitioner might be exempted from passing the test.

e) Petitioner made a representation on 17.02.2016 and on 05.10.2016 for the relaxation of the Rule 6 of Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Service Rules 1998, in pursuance, 1st Respondent through memo No.520/Estt.A1/2016 dated 23.03.2017 granted exemption from passing the test.

f) The 2nd Respondent vide memo no.108/E2/2016 dated 08.12.2017 regularized petitioner's services w.e.f 23.03.2017 instead of 07.06.2007. Regarding the same, a representation was made by the petitioner on 27.01.2018, but to no avail.

g) Petitioner was constrained to file W.P. No. 9543 of 2018 challenging the action of the Respondents in regularizing petitioners services w.e.f 23.07.2017 instead of from 07.06.2007 and this court by the order dated 22.03.2018 disposed of W.P.No. 9543 of 2018 directing the Respondents to dispose my representation dated 27.01.2018.

h) The Petitioner was further restrained to challenge the legality and validity of the Memo No. 108/E2/2016, dated 28.05.2018 rejecting the Petitioner’s representation and proceedings no.108/E2/2016 dated 08.12.2017 of the 2nd Respondent to the extent of regularizing the services of petitioner from 23.03.2017 instead of 07.06.2007.

i) The present controversy related to Clause 4 of annexure 1 of the rules which provide for recruitment method and qualifications for appointment. The post of Telugu/English typists other than in the offices other than heads of department and directorates to be filled by direct recruitment.

j) Clause (i) of column 3 states that the candidates shall have pass intermediate examination or shall possess equivalent qualification. The petitioner acquired Diploma in Commercial and Computer Practi