Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Sri Nyapathy Vijay, J
Kamireddy Bhavani – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners' qualifications not considered for selection. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. respondents' reasons for selection process. (Para 6 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. merit over preferences in appointment. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 4. legal provisions governing recruitment. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. rules conflict on merit and preference. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. importance of merit in recruitment process. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. court's interpretation of recruitment rules. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 8. public interest in merit-based selection. (Para 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 9. merit principles must govern recruitment. (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 10. advisability of polynomial adjustment in preferences. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 11. court's jurisdiction to address rule conflicts. (Para 37 , 38) |
| 12. court allows petitioners' claims based on merit. (Para 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 13. court grants relief to petitioners. (Para 42) |
COMMON ORDER:
In the present writ petitions, the Petitioners are questioning the non-consideration of their case for selection and appointment as School Assistants (SA) though they were qualified pursuant to notification No.01/Mega-DSC-TRC-1/2025 dated 20.04.2025 as illegal and arbitrary.
2. In these cases, after hea
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
