Ramesh Ranganathan, J. - (1.) We had earlier asked both Sri G. Vidyasagar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Telangana GENCO, and Smt. K. Aruna, learned Standing Counsel for A.P. GENCO, whether the appellants, who were appointed as Junior Plant Attendants in October, 2013, could also be accommodated along with the candidates who were held entitled to be appointed to the said posts by the order of the learned Single Judge. Both the learned Senior Counsel and learned Standing Counsel, have today expressed difficulty in accommodating the appellants herein, as it would adversely affect operation of the roster; and as these posts have, after 02.06.2014, been bifurcated between the States of Telangana and the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh.
(2.) Heard Sri G.V. Shivaji, Sri P. Lakshma Reddy and Sri K. Vasudeva Reddy, learned counsel for the appellants; Sri G.Vidyasagar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Telangana GENCO, Smt. K. Aruna, learned Standing Counsel for A.P. GENCO and Sri Chandraiah Sunkara, learned counsel for the respondents-writ petitioners and, with their consent, the writ appeals are disposed of at the stage of admission.
(3.) Reservation in favour of the physically handicapped, while making appointment to the posts of Junior Plant Attendants in both A.P. GENCO and Telangana GENCO is under challenge in these proceedings. A notification was issued on 05.01.2011 inviting applications and, thereafter, a supplementary notification dated 17.10.2011 was issued providing reservation in favour of the physically handicapped (physically challenged). While the notifications do not explicitly provide for 3% reservation in favour of the physically challenged to be distributed at 1% each among the visually challenged, the hearing impaired and the orthopaedically handicapped, it does not also specify that 1% reservation should be provided for each of these categories.;