Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the Memo.No.GAD03-NTFORT(GR1)/2022-GRP-1 (Comp.No. 1866514), Dt. 16.08.2024 issued by the 2nd Respondent Commission as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent Commission to give effect to the opinion of the Two Member Expert Committee to conduct interview and thereafter send appropriate proposals for creation of supernumerary post if so required in terms of the Letter No.2308024/SER-A/A2l2023-2, Dt.29.02.2024 of the 1st respondent Government addressed to the 2nd respondent Commission and to take consequential proceedings for selection of the petitioner and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the 2nd respondent Commission to reconsider the case of the petitioner in terms of Letter No.2308024/SER-A/A2l2023-2, Dt.29.02.2024 of the 1st respondent Government by suspending the impugned Memo.No.GAD03-NTFORT(GR1)/2022-GRP-1 (Comp.No. 1866514), Dt.16.08.2024 issued by the 2nd Respondent Commission, pending disposal of this writ petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.G.SEENA KUMAR SC For APPSC

2.GP FOR SERVICES I

The Court made the following:

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

W.P.No.7679 of 2025

O R DE R:

The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare Memo No.GAD03-NTFORT(GR1)/2022-GRP-1 (Comp.No.1866514), dated 16.08.2024 issued by Respondent No.2-APPSC as illegal and arbitrary.

2. The facts leading to filing of this writ petition are as follows:

The Respondent No.2-APPSC had issued notification No.39 of 2008 and a supplementary notification No.10 of 2009 for recruitment of posts under Group-I services. The Petitioner had applied for the same with Hall Ticket No.11818559 and was successful in the preliminary examination. Petitioner states that he had also fared well in the main examinations and was expecting a call for interviews. However, the Petitioner was not called for the interview. Thereafter, interviews were conducted in May, 2012 and a list of qualified candidates were displayed by APPSC on 12.05.2012. Respondent No.2-APPSC, as per its practice, does not disclose the marks of the candidates till the selections are finalized and the Petitioner could secure the marks obtained by him in the five papers of the main examination only on 12.05.2012. In the five papers in the main examination, the Petitioner secured 88, 83, 97 and 130 marks insofar as Paper Nos.I, II, III and V. As regards Paper-IV (Science and Technology), the Petitioner secured only 49 marks. Immediately, the Petitioner submitted a representation on 15.05.2012 requesting the APPSC to examine the issue regarding Paper-IV and re-evaluate or recount the marks in respect of the said paper. As there was no response, the Petitioner had requested the APPSC under Right to Information Act to furnish copies of answer sheets and a direction was given by the Appellate Authority under the said Act on 14.03.2013 to permit inspection of the answer script. However, the APPSC did not permit the Petitioner to inspect the answer script as the issue regarding recruitment was pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

3. After disposal of the case before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the answer script was given to the Petitioner. On perusal of the answer script, the Petitioner was awarded only 2 to 3 marks for questions which carry 10 marks and for one question, ‘0’ marks were awarded. The Petitioner then filed another representation to the APPSC on 01.04.2016 for re-evaluating the answer sheets. As there was