SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 38115

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
Pulla Karthik, J
Bommena Vanaja – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.35779 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ramesh Chilla
For the Respondents:Advocate General

Governmental authorities in public recruitment may grant weightage for contractual or outsourced experience to promote efficiency, provided such weightage is capped at a maximum of 20% of the total evaluation marks to ensure a fair and competitive selection process.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Art. 14, 16, 19(g) and 21 - Recruitment - Selection Criteria - Weightage points for contract service - Enhancement from 20 to 30 marks - Validity - Court held that enhancement of weightage points beyond 20% of total marks is contrary to established judicial precedents set by the Full Bench and is deemed unsustainable - Employer allowed to apportion marks for contractual experience, but such marks must not exceed 20% of total marks. (Paras 16, 18, 19)

Facts of the case:
A recruitment notification for Multi-Purpose Health Assistant (Female) was issued on 26.07.2023 with 100 total points (80 written, 20 service weightage). Subsequently, through a Government Order dated 19.08.2023, the government enhanced the service weightage points to 30, reducing written exam marks to 70. The petitioner challenged this amendment as arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of constitutional provisions and binding Full Bench precedents.

Findings of Court:
The Court held that while the government has the power to define selection criteria, the limit of 20% for service weightage is a settled legal position in State service recruitments. Enhancing weightage to 30% violates the principle of fair play in open recruitment. The impugned Government Order is set aside to the extent of this enhancement.

Issues: Whether the state is justified in increasing service weightage points for contractual/outsourced employees from 20 to 30 for public recruitment.

Ratio Decidendi: Weightage marks for contractual service are legally permissible to ensure efficient public service, but to maintain fairness and balance between open market candidates and experienced workers, these must be restricted to a maximum of 20% of the total selection points.

Result: Writ Petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. overview of the petition, the nature of recruitment, and arguments concerning the modification of criteria for multi-purpose health assistants. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. court's analysis of whether the modification of rules mid-recruitment process resulted in unfair selection criteria. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. adherence to binding precedents requiring weightage for contract workers to be capped at 20% of total marks. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)

ORDER:

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:

“…to issue a writ, order, or direction, more in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st Respondent – Principal Secretary, Health, Medical & Family Welfare Department in issuing the G.O.Ms. No.133 HM&FW(B) Department, dated: 19.08.2023 by which altered the selection criteria by increasing the points for service in state government hospitals/institutions/programmes for the post of Multi Purpose Health Assistant (Female) from 20 to 30 and resulting in grave injustice to the petitioner herein is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, contemptuous as the maximum limit of 20 points was established by the Full Bench of this Hon’ble Court in WP No.40157 of 2017 & Batch dated 18.09.2020, and against the principles of natural justice and violative of Art 14, 16, 19 (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently pleased to set aside the G.O.Ms. No. 133 HM&FW (B) Department, dated 19.08.2023 and direct the 2nd respondent to conduct the written examination for 80 marks and restricting the points awarded for service in state government hospitals/institutions/programmes to 20 in accordance with G.O.Ms. No. 59 HM&FW (B) Department, dated 07.06.2022 and the Full Bench Judgment in WP No.40157 of 2017 & Batch dated 18.09.2020 and pass…”

2. Heard Sri Ramesh Chilla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and the learned Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that respondent No.2 had issued a recruitment notification vide Notification No.2/2023 dated 26.07.2023, inviting applications for filling up (1,520) vacancies in the post of Multi-Purpose Health Assistant (MPHA) (Female) under the Commissionerate of Health, Medical and Family Welfare Department, Government of Telangana, duly following the selection procedure mentioned in G.O.Ms.Nos.59, 60 and 63 dated 07.06.2022 and 14.06.2022. In pursuance of the same, the petitioner, being fully qualified and eligible, applied for the said post vide App.Ref.No.:M/2023/17531/191753197/ 26633. While so, apart from illegally and arbitrarily increasing the number of vacancies from (1,560) to (1,666), respondent No.1 has also altered the selection procedure and criteria vide G.O.Ms.No.133 dated 19.08.2023, pursuant to which, a corrigendum dated 19.08.2023 to Notification No.2/2023 was also issued by respondent No.2. It was further submitted that as per the original Notification, a candidate would be selected based on (100) points, out of which, (80) points are awarded for written examination and (20) points are awarded as weightage points for the service rendered in State Government Hospitals/Institutions/ Programmes on contract or outsourcing basis. However, by virtue of the impugned G.O.Ms.No.133 dated 19.08.2023, the weightage points have been increased from (20) to (30), consequently, reducing the maximum points in the written examination from (80) to (70), which is not only illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16, 19(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India, but also contravenes the binding ratio laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in its order dated 18.09.2020 in W.P.No.40157 of 2017 and batch. It was further submitted that the Computer-based Test was conducted on 29.12.2024 for (70) marks. However, as per the directions of the Full Bench of this Court in W.P.No.40157 of 2

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top