Termination of appointments based on disability certification must adhere to principles of natural justice, and any arbitrary action lacking notice is unlawful.

ORDER :

Pulla Karthik, J.

Heard Sri E.Madan Mohan Rao, learned senior counsel, representing Sri M.Krupakar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Government Pleader for Services-III appearing for respondent No.1, Sri S.Bhoopal Reddy, learned Standing counsel appearing for respondents 2 and 4, and Sri Nayakwadi Ramesh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.3.

2) The case of the petitioner is that in pursuance to the notification No.3/2023, dated 05.04.2023, issued by respondent No.3, for recruitment to the post of Post Graduate Teachers (PGTs) in respondent No.2-Society, under general recruitment, the petitioner, being fully eligible and qualified, has applied and appeared for examination in the month of August, 2023. Thereafter, respondent No.3-Board has declared the results wherein the petitioner got selected for the post of PGT (Biological Science) vide proceedings dated 25.07.2024, issued posting orders vide Rc.No.A1/2300/2024/PGT-BS/MZ-1/5, dated 15.02.2024, and she reported to duty on 27.07.2024 before respondent No.4. While so, respondent No.2 has issued proceedings of cancellation of posting orders vide Rc.No.A1/1003/2024-4, dated 21.08.2024. Questioning the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

3) Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was selected and appointed vide proceedings dated 25.07.2024 after undergoing due process of selection. Therefore, respondent No.2 cannot cancel petitioner’s posting and appointment orders directly without issuing any notice. It is further contended that the petitioner was sent to Government ENT Hospital, Hyderabad, for medical examination and the competent authority has issued certificate bearing No.7328, dated 28.08.2024, wherein the percentage of disability is clearly mentioned as 41% which means suffering from hearing impairment categorized as II (a). Earlier also, the petitioner got examined in Government Hospital at Khammam and the authorities have issued the certificate for person with disability vide Certificate No.22280360120119302, dated 21.01.2015. Further, under G.O.Ms.No.31, dated 01.12.2009, the guidelines and procedure are prescribed for evaluation of various disabilities and for certification for speech and hearing disability under category of hearing and impairment, as per which, the age of impairment is 40% to 50%. As per the certificate dated 21.01.2015, the percentage of impairment is 54% and the certificate dated 28.08.2024 issued by competent authorities of ENT Hospital also clearly shows the percentage of impairment as 41%. Therefore, the action of respondent No.2 in terminating the services of the petitioner without issuing any show cause notice to the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice.

3.1) Learned senior counsel further submits that in the impugned order it is stated that the hearing impaired persons so selected for the post were referred to Medical Board and received report vide letter dated 05.06.2024 observing that the petitioner has sustained 29% hearing disability instead of minimum prescribed 40% of hearing disability in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31, Women Development Child Welfare & Disabled Welfare (DW) Department, dated 01.12.2009. The said certificate dated 05.06.2024 was not even supplied to the petitioner. Relying upon the said certificate dated 05.06.2024, the services of the petitioner were terminated vide impugned proceedings dated 21.08.2024 without issuing any notice or affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is further