Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
Pulla Karthik, J.
Bommena Vanaja – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
Writ Petition No.35779 of 2024
Decided On : 12-11-2025
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
The petitioner challenged the government order that increased the service weightage points from 20 to 30 for recruitment to the post of Multi-Purpose Health Assistant (Female) (!) (!) .
The original recruitment notification specified that the selection process would allocate 80 points for written examination and 20 points for service in state government hospitals/institutions on contract or outsourcing basis (!) (!) (!) .
The subsequent corrigendum issued on the same day as the government order increased the service weightage points from 20 to 30, thereby reducing the maximum marks for the written examination from 80 to 70 (!) (!) (!) .
The court examined whether amending the rules mid-process and increasing the service weightage points was justified. It was found that the corrigendum was issued prior to the last date of application, so it did not constitute changing the rules in the middle of the process (!) .
The court emphasized that increasing the service weightage points beyond the maximum of 20 violates established principles of fairness in recruitment and contradicts binding precedent (!) (!) .
Past decisions have consistently held that the maximum service weightage points should not exceed 20, and any attempt to award more than this amount is contrary to the principles of fair play and natural justice (!) (!) .
The court noted that the government’s policy decision to increase the weightage was a discretionary policy matter, but such decisions cannot override the binding legal principle that service weightage should be capped at 20 (!) (!) .
The court found the enhancement from 20 to 30 points to be unsustainable and contrary to the established legal framework, leading to the conclusion that this increase should be set aside (!) (!) .
Consequently, the court ordered that the recruitment process be conducted strictly in accordance with the original notification, which limited service weightage to 20 points (!) .
All pending miscellaneous petitions were closed, and no costs were awarded (!) (!) .
In summary, the key legal principle reaffirmed is that the maximum permissible service weightage points in such recruitment processes are limited to 20, and any deviation from this cap is illegal and must be rectified by reverting to the original criteria.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to g.o increasing service points. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments against altered selection criteria. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. judicial observations on recruitment fairness. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 4. principles established from prior cases. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. final ruling on recruitment criteria restoration. (Para 16 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
ORDER :
Pulla Karthik, J.
This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , is filed seeking the following relief:
“…to issue a writ, order, or direction, more in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st Respondent – Principal Secretary, Health, Medical & Family Welfare Department in issuing the G.O.Ms. No.133 HM&FW(B) Department, dated: 19.08.2023 by which altered the selection criteria by increasing the points for service in state government hospitals/institutions/programmes for the post of Multi Purpose Health Assistant (Female) from 20 to 30 and resulting in grave injustice to the petitioner herein is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contemptuous as the maximum limit of 20 points was established by the Full Bench of this Hon’ble Court in WP No.40157 of 2017 & Batch dated 18.09.2020, and against the principles of natural justice and violative of Art 14, 16, 19 (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently pleased to set aside the G.O.Ms. No. 133 HM&FW (B) Department, dated 19.08.2023 and direct the 2nd respondent to conduct the written examination for 80 marks and restricting the points awarded for service in state government hospitals/institutions/programmes to 20 in accordance with G.O.Ms. No. 59 HM&FW (B) Department, dated 07.06.2022 and the Full Bench Judgment in WP No.40157 of 2017 & Batch dated 18.09.2020 and pass…”
2. Heard Sri Ramesh Chilla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and the learned Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent No.2 had issued a recruitment notification vide Notification No.2/2023 dated 26.07.2023, inviting applications for filling up (1,520) vacancies in the post of Multi-Purpose Health Assistant (MPHA) (Female) under the Commissionerate of Health, Medical and Family Welfare Department, Government of Telangana, duly following the selection procedure mentioned in G.O.Ms.Nos.59, 60 and 63 dated 07.06.2022 and 14.06.2022. In pursuance of the same, the petitioner, being fully qualified and eligible, applied for the said post vide App.Ref.No.:M/2023/17531/191753197/ 26633. While so, apart from illegally and arbitrarily increasing the number of vacancies from (1,560) to (1,666), respondent No.1 has also altered the selection procedure and criteria vide G.O.Ms.No.133 dated 19.08.2023, pursuant to which, a corrigendum dated 19.08.2023 to Notification No.2/2023 was also issued by respondent No.2. It was further submitted that as per the original Notification, a candidate would be selected based on (100) points, out of which, (80) points are awarded for written examination and (20) points are awarded as weightage points for the service rendered in State Government Hospitals/Institutions/ Programmes on contract or outsourcing basis. However, by virtue of the impugned G.O.Ms.No.133 dated 19.08.2023, the weightage points have been increased from (20) to (30), consequently, reducing the maximum points in the written examination from (80) to (70), which is not only illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16, 19(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India , but also contravenes the binding ratio laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in its order dated 18.09.2020 in W.P.No.40157 of 2017 and batch. It was further submitted that the Computer- based Test was conducted on 29.12.2024 for (70) marks. However, as per the directions of the Full Bench of this Court in W.P.No.40157 of 2017 and batch, the total marks should not be less than (80). As such, the (70) questions can be proportionally scaled so as to cor
Alterations to recruitment criteria must adhere to established legal precedents, not infringe upon fair selection principles.
Court affirmed the entitlement to service weightage points for contractual employment, invalidating the outsourcing classification that affected selection.
The court established that public employment must adhere to principles of equality and non-discrimination, affirming the right to weightage marks for COVID-19 service under applicable government orde....
The court established that public employment must adhere to principles of equality and non-discrimination, affirming that COVID-19 service should be recognized in recruitment processes.
Contractual employees are entitled to weightage in recruitment processes only if appointed through lawful means, adhering to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
