ORDER:

(Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)

Mr. Chandraiah Sunkara, learned counsel for the petitioners.

Ms. V.Uma Devi, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

2. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following relief:

“For the reasons stated in the accompanying Affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in operating the roster points to the women candidates in the Notification dt. 05-01-2011 & Supplementary Notification dt. 17-10-

2011, under the guise of implementing the 33.33% reservation in favour of women candidates in terms of Regulation 22 and 22- A of APSEB Service Regulations Part-II r/w Rule 22 & 22-A of A.P. State and Sub- ordinate Service Rules, 1996 and provisionally selecting the available women candidates, while keeping the other posts vacant as backlog vacancies on the ground that there are no sufficient women candidates are available, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the Dicta laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of R.K. Sabarwal and others Vs. State of Punjab and others, reported in AIR 1995 SC 1371 = 1995 (2) SCC 745, Rajesh Kumar Daria Vs. Rajastan Public Service Commission and others. reported in AIR 2007 SC 3127 and Public Service Commission, Uttaranchal Vs. Mamta Bisht and others reported in : 2010 (12) SCC 204 and consequently set-aside the 100 point roster points prescribed in Regulation 22 & 22-A of the APSEB Service Regulations, Part II & Rules 22 & 22-A of A.P. State & Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 in so far as women roster points are concerned and direct the respondents to follow the posts based roster points as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the R.K. Sabarwal Case and follow the 33 1/3% reservation in favour of women, without earmarking any roster points for them and by following the procedure indicated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases reported in : AIR 2007 SC 3127 and 2010 (12) SCC 204, by counting the meritorious women candidates also against the number of special reservation quota for women and accordingly consider the Petitioners’ cases for appointment against their respective roster points, based on their merit, as Junior Plant Attendants by duly revising the provisional selection list and pass such other orders as may be just.”

3. Admittedly, the process of recruitment in pursuance of the notification dated 17.10.2011 is over. The selected candidates have not been impleaded in this writ petition.

4. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, keeping the question of law involved in this writ petition open, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand closed.

_______________________________

ALOK ARADHE, CJ _______________________________

ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J Date: 22.12.2023 KL