THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA

ORDER:

The petitioners belong to the ST community and hold

qualifications including M.A., B.Ed., and B.A. (Telugu) as a single subject from Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Open University (2003). They applied for the post of Language Pandit (Telugu) in DSC 2006 and secured good rankings, but their appointments were withheld on the ground that their single-subject degree was not considered equivalent. Despite multiple representations and a report by an expert committee (2009) recommending their eligibility, the respondents have not appointed them. Similar cases have been decided in favor of single-subject degree holders by the Tribunal, High Court, and Supreme Court, affirming the equivalence of degrees from Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Open University. Therefore, they seek a writ of mandamus directing their appointment as Language Pandits (Telugu) based on their merit

in DSC 2006 with all consequential benefits.

2. Heard Sri D.Balakishan Rao, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for

Services-I for respondents. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for respondents filed counter affidavit stating that petitioners’ claim for appointment as Language Pandits (Telugu) based on their single-subject B.A. (Telugu) from Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Open University is untenable. The DSC 2006 notification and Government orders explicitly excluded single- subject certificate holders. The petitioners’ earlier similar claim in O.A.No.7896 of 2007 was dismissed, and no appeal was filed. Their claim is also barred by delay since the recruitment concluded long ago and vacancies have been filled in subsequent recruitments. The statutory rules require qualifications the petitioners do not meet, as upheld by the High Court. Government-appointed expert committees have also excluded single-subject holders. Interim relief granted earlier was conditional and is now sought to be vacated. Therefore, this Writ petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.

4. Learned counsel for petitioners filed reply affidavit stating that the dismissal of O.A.No.7896 of 2007 was premature since the expert committee’s report on the equivalence of single- subject degrees was pending. They meet the expert committee’s recommended qualifications and qualify for appointment as Language Pandit (Telugu). Citing tribunal, High Court, and Supreme Court decisions affirming the equivalence of such degrees, petitioners claims rejecting their appointment is arbitrary and discriminatory, violating constitutional rights. They seek appointment based on their merit and ranking in DSC

2006 and request the court to recognize their entitlement.

5. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the records, it is evident that petitioners seek appointment as Language Pandits (Telugu) based on their single-subject B.A. (Telugu) degree from Dr.B.R. Ambedkar Open University and their merit in DSC 2006. However, the DSC 2006 notification and relevant Government orders explicitly excluded single-subject degree holders from eligibility. The petitioners’ earlier claim was dismissed by the Administrative Tribunal and was not appealed, rendering the issue res judicata. It may be noted that the recruitment process concluded long ago, and subsequent recruitments have filled the vacancies. The statutory rules prescribe qualifications which the petitioners do not fulfill, as supported by expert committee reports. Therefore, this Court finds no merit in this case, as the claim is barred by delay and the express terms of the recruitment notifications.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.

____________________________ NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J Date: 27.06.2025 dgr