ORDER

Petitioner is a candidate in the District Selection Committee Examination conducted in the year 1998, for selection of Secondary Grade Teachers. A perusal of the writ affidavitdiscloses that after the written examination, apparently noticing that sufficient number of candidates were not making it to the further selection process, the Government issued GOMs.No.618, Education Department, dated 18.05.1998, lowering the minimum qualifying cut-off marks in the DSC Examination, thereby the petitioner and others came within the zone of consideration for selection and accordingly they were called for interview. However, before issuance of appointment orders to the petitioner and others, the matter ended up before this Court and this Court stayed the selections. It is stated that the reduced qualifying mark was finalized in 17 districts and appointment orders were issued; however, though selections were finalized in Warangal, Khammam and other districts, appointment orders were not issued due to stay granted by this Court. The Government filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and the apex Court ultimately allowed the special leave petitions, and set aside the judgment of this Court. It is contended that pending proceedings before the Supreme Court, though the appointees basing on pre-revised criteria were allowed to continue; after the judgment of the Hon’ ble Supreme Court, the petitioner and others were entitled to issuance of appointment orders.

It is stated that applications were filed before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by filing O.As., and the Tribunal directed the Government to review the selections in terms of GOMs.No.618; however, the Government filed writ petitions, namely W.P.No.23253 of 2010 and batch before this Court and the writ petitions were dismissed by the Hon’ble Division Bench. It is the grievance of the petitioner herein that the Government, is contemplating to implement the judgment only to the extent of the petitioners therein.

It is further stated that in the year 1999, the 3^rd respondent-District Educational Officer published a Selection List consisting of 212 candidates, wherein the petitioner figures at serial No.129, and the petitioner secured 60 marks however his candidature has not been considered, but the candidates who scored less than him have been appointed. Petitioner made representations to the respondent Nos.3 and 4 through Grievance Cell requesting to consider him for appointment as Secondary Grade Teacher, but no action has been taken yet. Hence, this writ petition.

2. Heard Mr. J.R.Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioner; and learned Government Pleader for Services-I. Perused the record.

3. It is represented by both the learned counsel that the issue in this writ petition has been the subject matter of adjudication in W.P.No.23253 of 2010 and batch, and the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, by Common Order dated 08.11.2011 allowed the writ petitions filed by the petitioners therein (who are Applicants in the O.As before the Tribunal), and dismissed the writ petitions filed by the Government. It is therefore submitted that similar orders may be passed in the present writ petition.

4. Having considered the respective submissions and perused the record, it may be noted that the Hon’ble Division Bench had, in W.P.No.23253 of 2010 and batch, adjudicated the issue relating to the selection of Secondary Grade Teachers under DSC-1998 notification, and the grievance espoused herein is squarely covered by the Common Order dated 08.11.2011 passed in that batch of writ petitions. The operative portion of the Common Order dated 08.11.2011 reads as follows:

“For the aforesaid reasons, the judgment of the Tribunal dated 18.7.2008 in O.A.Nos.8391 of 2005, 587 and 146 of 2006 is set aside and Writ Petition Nos.24416 of 2009, 4287 and 17730 of 2010 are allowed. The petitioners herein shall also be entitled to same benefits as applicants in O.A.Nos.355 of 2006 and bat