Case Law
Subject : Employment Law - Public Service Recruitment
On February 10, 2025, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, comprising Justices Ravi Nath Tilhari and
The case arose from three writ petitions concerning the selection process for 22 posts of Assistant Conservator of Forests, as notified by the APPSC in 2007.
The legal question at hand was whether the APPSC's method of applying horizontal reservation was lawful, particularly in light of established precedents regarding the treatment of such reservations.
The APPSC and the State of Andhra Pradesh defended their selection process, asserting that the vacancies were filled according to merit and that the selection of women candidates was justified under both vertical and horizontal reservation principles. They maintained that the applicant's rank did not qualify him for selection given the number of vacancies available.
The court referenced several key judgments, including
Indra Sawhney v. Union of India
and
Rajesh
The court found that the APPSC had erred in its application of horizontal reservation, effectively treating it as a vertical reservation by selecting more women candidates than allowed. The judgment stated:
> "The Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission and the State failed to apply it correctly as per the settled law and thereby illegally denied the selection and appointment to the applicant."
The court concluded that the applicant was entitled to be appointed against the available vacancies, either in the BC-D category or in the open category, depending on the availability of posts.
The High Court dismissed the writ petitions filed by the APPSC and the State of Andhra Pradesh, allowing
Additionally, the court imposed costs of ₹1,00,000 on both the State and the APPSC, emphasizing the need for accountability in the recruitment process.
This ruling reinforces the importance of adhering to established legal principles regarding reservations in public service, ensuring that merit is not overshadowed by procedural misapplications.
#LegalNews #ReservationLaw #AndhraPradesh #AndhraPradeshHighCourt
Nashik Court Reserves Verdict on Khan's TCS Bail Plea
29 Apr 2026
Delhi Court Grants Bail to I-PAC Director in PMLA Case
30 Apr 2026
No Historic Record of Saraswati Temple Demolition, Muslim Body Tells MP High Court in Bhojshala Dispute
30 Apr 2026
No Absolute Bar on Simultaneous Parole/Furlough for Co-Accused Under Delhi Prisons Rules: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 2026
Rejection of Jurisdiction Plea under Section 16 Arbitration Act Not Challengeable under Section 34 Till Final Award: Supreme Court
30 Apr 2026
'Living Separately' Under Section 13B HMA Means Cessation Of Marital Obligations, Regardless Of Residence: Patna High Court
30 Apr 2026
Belated Challenge by Non-Bidders to GeM Tender Conditions for School Sports Equipment Not Maintainable: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 2026
Political Rivalry Doesn't Warrant Custodial Arrest in Forgery Case: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Citing Article 21
01 May 2026
Wife Can't Seek Husband's Income Tax Details via RTI for Maintenance Claims: Delhi High Court
01 May 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.