SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Telangana) 59

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Pulla Karthik, J.
S.Sunil Prem Kumar and others - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary, Public Health and Family Welfare Department and others - Respondents
Writ Petition No.44489 of 2022
Decided On : 05-03-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri Srikanth Chintala
For the Respondent: Sri M.Ram Gopal Rao, learned Standing Counsel, Sri Goda Siva, learned Senior Counsel representing Smt.Goda Ramalakshmi, learned counsel

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rules of the game, meaning the criteria for selection, cannot be altered by the authorities concerned in the middle or after the process of selection has commenced.

Headnote:

CRA - Radiographer Selection - Notification No.59 of 2017, G.O.Ms.No.282 - The court discussed the qualifications prescribed for the post of Radiographer, the deviation from the notification in the selection process, and the legal principles governing the recruitment process. The court emphasized that the rules of the game cannot be changed after the recruitment process has commenced and set aside the selection of certain candidates based on higher qualifications not specified in the notification.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners applied for the post of Radiographer as per Notification No.59 of 2017, but the selection process deviated from the notification, leading to their exclusion from the final selection list.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the selection process deviated from the notification, and the inclusion of candidates with higher qualifications without issuing a corrigendum was contrary to the settled principles of law.

Issues: The issues included the deviation from the notification in the selection process, the consideration of higher qualifications without a corrigendum, and the violation of the rules of the game after the recruitment process had commenced.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the rules of the game cannot be changed after the recruitment process has commenced and set aside the selection of certain candidates based on higher qualifications not specified in the notification.

Final Decision: The selection of unofficial respondent Nos. 3 to 5 vide final Selection list, dated 01.12.2022, was set aside, and respondent Nos.1 and 2 were directed to fill-up the vacancies strictly in accordance with the Notification No.59 of 2017.

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:

    “ … to issue an order Writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ To declare the selection list dated 1.12.2022 issued by the 2nd respondent in selecting the candidates who does not have CRA as per the condition stipulated in the notification No 59/2017 dated 08.11.2017 in contrary to the said notification as illegal arbitrary unconstitutional against the principles of natural justice and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution and coupled with flagrant violation of the notification No 59/2017 Dated 08.11.2017.

ii) To call for the records or orders passed by the 2nd respondent enabling the candidates other than who has Certificate of Radiology Assistant CRA under the premise of Expert Committee report after the issuance of notification no 59/2017 dated 08.11.2017 which was informed to the petitioners as an answer to the RTI application dated 29.05.2019 and issuing selection list in accordance with the said proceedings by enabling ineligible candidates into the selection zone vide dated 01.12.2022 as illegal arbitrary against the principles of natural justice violative of article 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and against the notification no 59/2017 dated 08.11.2017 issued by the 2nd respondent and to declare the said selection list is running contrary to the notification no 59/2017.

iii) To declare the action of respondent no 2 in not considering the representations of the petitioners dated 12.03.2019 and 16.03.2021 as illegal arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

iv) To consequently direct the 2nd respondent to strictly adhere to the notification no 59/2017 dated 08.11.2017 and recall and revise the selection list dated 01.12.2022 by excluding the candidates without CRA and further direct the respondents to declare the petitioners are selected to the said posts in accordance with the notification and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”

2. Heard Sri Srikanth Chintala, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri Goda Siva, the learned Senior Counsel representing Smt.Goda Ramalakshmi, the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 3 to 5, the learned Government Pleader for Services-II appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri M.Ram Gopal Rao, the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2-Telangana State Public Service Commission.

3. It has been contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that in response to the notification issued by respondent No.2 vide Notification No.59 of 2017, dated 08.11.2017, the petitioners have applied for the post of Radiographer in Director of Public Health and Family Welfare and appeared for the written test with hall ticket Nos.179001097, 1759000226 and 1759000385 respectively and petitioner No.1 was placed at Sl.No.138, petitioner No.2 at Sl.No.45 and petitioner No.3 at Sl.No.44 in the merit list published on 03.01.2019. But, surprisingly, the respondent No.2 published a note dated 09.02.2019 stating that request of certain persons for adding weightage marks was considered and one week before the certification i.e. before 26.02.2019 and released another “Revised Merit List” with Qualification and Service Weightage” in which, the names of unofficial respondents were shown above the names of the petitioners herein. Therefore, the petitioners went down in the revised merit list. However, the petitioners were shown up in the Provisional List of candidates for verification of certificates @ 1:3 ratio on 22.02.2019. Further, aggrieved by the revised merit list, petitioner Nos.2 and 3 have submitted representations on 02.03.2019, 12.03.2019

                  Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                  1
                  2
                  3
                  4
                  5
                  6
                  7
                  8
                  9
                  10
                  11
                  SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                  supreme today icon
                  logo-black

                  An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                  Please visit our Training & Support
                  Center or Contact Us for assistance

                  qr

                  Scan Me!

                  India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                  For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                  whatsapp-icon Back to top