APHC010928762002 Bench Sr.No:-22 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3506]

AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 18885 of 2002 K.satti Babu ...Petitioner Vs.

Correspondent M R College and Others ...Respondent(s)

**********

Advocate for Petitioner: P V KRISHNAIAH Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): GP FOR EDUCATION, DODDALA PRUDHVI TEJA CORAM : SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 11th December 2025

ORDER:

The present writ petition assails the action of respondents in not absorbing petitioner against the aided post of Lecturer in Economics to be arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India and consequential direction to the respondents to absorb petitioner in the vacancy of aided post of Lecturer in Economics.

2. (a) Petitioner stated to have been appointed as Lecturer in Economics on 20.07.1993 against unaided post on consolidated pay/part-time basis. Such appointment was in pursuance to the selection process envisaged under G.O.Ms.No.12, dated 10.01.1992 and the selection committee, which was constituted in furtherance thereof, stated to have evaluated the applications of respective parties and eventually, the petitioner came to be appointed.

(b) It is stated that since then, petitioner has been continuously working with 2^nd respondent. As vacancy arose on account of retirement of one Mr.A.Venkatapati Raju, Lecturer in Economics, in the month of February 2003, petitioner had made request for absorption in the said post, which otherwise was aided post. However, as his representation was not considered favourably, the present writ petition came to be filed.

3. Pending the writ petition, an interim order was passed on 30.09.2002 directing the respondents to consider the case of petitioner for absorption in pursuance to his representation and accordingly, the representation came to be disposed of by order dated 06.02.2003, however, the request of petitioner was not acceded to.

4. (a) Both the 1^st respondent Management as well as 3^rd respondent filed their respective counters. In the counter filed by 1^st respondent, who has appointed petitioner in unaided vacancy, has taken stand that though petitioner has applied for selection in pursuance to the notification dated 16.06.1995, which was issued for filling up of aided vacancy in terms of G.O.Ms.No.12, dated 10.01.1992, he could not be successful, however, he has been appointed in unaided post on consolidated basis. Due to the vacancy that arose on account of retirement of Sri A.Venkatapati Raju, though petitioner has requested for absorption in the said vacancy, inasmuch as the Commissioner was competent to decide as to whether petitioner be absorbed, the college has addressed the issue to the Commissioner.

(b) Similarly, the 3^rd respondent filed counter stating that in pursuance to the regular selection process that was undertaken for filling up of aided vacancy, one Mr.M.Ramana came to be selected and appointed to the post of Lecturer in Economics and insofar as petitioner was concerned, he was only appointed on part-time basis.

(c) Further, in terms of Government Memo dated 11.07.1991, ban was imposed on appointment of part-time lecturers during the years 1989-90 and 1990-91, despite the same, the petitioner came to be appointed by the 1^st respondent Management. Even otherwise, the posts which fell vacant were filled up considering the rule of reservation and following the procedure of regular selection as contemplated under G.O.Ms.No.12, dated 10.01.1992 and the petitioner’s request, therefore, came to be rejected by proceedings dated 06.02.2003, which was otherwise for regularization of service in aided vacancies.

(d) Petitioner has filed memo dated 27.10.2025 annexing the documents to show that petitioner has been appointed through regular selection process after issuance of notification and selection by selection committee and further that even petitioner at later point of time came to be once again selected in regular post as the existing lecturers who were