Point of Law: No additions/change being permitted.

JUDGMENT :

T. VINOD KUMAR, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court, in W.P. No. 19232 of 2019, dated 21.10.2020, directing the 2nd respondent-Telangana State Public Service Commission (for short ‘the Commission’) to re-examine the experience certificates of 39 candidates, the present writ appeal is filed. The Appellants mainly assailed the correctness of the said direction given by the learned single Judge of this Court as being contrary to the settled position of law.

2. The appellants herein are the petitioners in W.P. No. 19232 of 2019. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as arrayed in the writ petition.

3. Heard Sri. R. Sushanth Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners; learned Government Pleader for Education, appearing for the 1st respondent; Sri. D. Balakishan Rao, learned standing counsel for the Telangana State Public Service Commission, appearing for the 2nd respondent; Sri. Nirmala Bhupal Reddy, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent; Sri. S. Rahul Reddy, learned counsel for the 4th respondent and Sri. G. Vidya Sagar, learned senior counsel representing Smt. K. Udaya Sree, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 8 to 28.

4. The facts of the case in a nutshell are that, the 2nd respondent-Commission issued Notification No. 29 of 2017, dated 02.06.2017, inviting applications to fill up 304 vacancies to the post of Principals in various Gurukuls and residential schools run by the Telangana State Government. The mode of applying to the above posts was specified as through online process. As per the said notification, the interested candidates were required to apply for One Time Registration (OTR) through official website of the 2nd respondent- Commission and all the required information has to be provided by the candidates through OTR only; the date for making online registration and submission of application and documents was specified as between 06.06.2017 to 24.06.2017; as per the notification, the preliminary (screening) test was to be held on 16.07.2017 and the main examination was scheduled on 12/13.08.2017. One of the condition specified in the said notification for the candidates applying for the above post, is that the documents submitted/uploaded along with the application through online registration process shall be final, which includes the prospective candidates filing the proof of possessing teaching experience of five years, after obtaining the qualifying examination, i.e. Post Graduation and administrative experience of three years and that the 2nd respondent- Commission will not entertain the submission of new documents under any circumstance after the last date specified viz. 24.06.2017. It is the further case of the petitioners that after going through all the details specified in the notification, the petitioners have applied for the vacancies notified and after undergoing preliminary (screening) test and written examination, the petitioners were shortlisted for interview in the form of 1:2 ratio. However, the applications of some of the candidates came to be rejected by the 2nd respondent-Commission, on the ground, as not being in compliance with the conditions specified in the notification; the documents submitted, on verification were found not to be genuine or fabricated. In the said process of screening, the applications of 914 candidates were rejected by the 2nd respondent-Commission.

5. Questioning the action of rejection of application by the 2nd respondent, some of the candidates, whose applications have been rejected, have approached this Court by filing writ petitions and a learned single Judge of this Court by a common order, dated 10.04.2019, in W.P. No. 5672 of 2019 and batch of cases, disposed of the writ petitions; found fault with the rejection orders passed by the 2nd respondent-Commission, by a single line order, without assigning reasons, in each of the rejected candidate’s case. The learned single Judge, while allo