GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH K V RAGHAVENDRA RAO K SRINIVASULU K RAMANUJAM GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH V HANUMANTHA RAO Vs. P DILIP KUMAR:STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH:Y V SATYANARAYANA RAO:Y V SATYANARAYANA RAO:GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By Advertisement No. 6/88 dated 1/12/1988, the Andhra Pradesh public service commission (for short 'psc') invited applications for 60 vacancies in the cadre of Deputy Executive Engineers in different services: (a) R and B Engineering Service, (b) P. H. and M. Engineering Service, (c) Engineering Service and (d) Panchayat Raj Engineering Service in the common scale of Rs. 1980-3500 to be filled by direct recruitment. These vacancies were shown in the advertisement at Code G-l under the head central Recruitment. The educational and other qualifications for the posts in question were set out to be Bachelor of Engineering degree (Highways, Civil or Mechanical) of a recognised University for (a) and (d) services, a degree in Civil or Mechanical Engineering of a recognised University for (b) service and a degree in Bachelor of Engineering, Civil or Mechanical of a recognised University for (c) service. Insofar as (b) category is concerned, it was mentioned that preference shall be given to persons possessing five years' experience in Irrigation or Execution of Water Supply and Drainage Scheme. In respect of posts in (a) and (c) categories, it was further mentioned that post-graduate qualification of an Indian or Foreign University shall be treated as 'an additional qualification' and preference shall be given to such candidates. Para 7 of the advertisement stated that the selection will be made on the basis of written examination tobe followed by oral test/interview for the posts in Code G-1. The scheme of examination was detailed in Annx. 6 of the advertisement. Pursuant to the said advertisement both graduates and post-graduates applied for the posts in question and were subjected to a written test and those who secured the qualifying marks were called for oral test/interviews. Some candidates who did not secure the qualifying marks and were not called for oral test/interviews filed O. A. Nos. 1736 to 1739 of 1990 contending that they ought to have been called and the total number of marks secured both at the written examination and oral test should have been taken into consideration for the purpose of determining the successful candidates to be empanelled for appointment to the posts in question.

(2.) The PSC on an interpretation of the relevant rule as placed by the High court of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Petition No. 2568 of 1982 decided by Waghray, J. on 14/03/1986 first selected post-graduate engineers for the available vacancies under open competition and since sufficient number of post-graduates were available, no graduate was selected for the posts in question. In the category of reserved seats for backward classes, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, post-graduates to the extent they were available were selected and in the case of non-availability of post-graduates,graduates were selected for appointment to the posts in question. It would at this stage be relevant to reproduce the rule in question:

(3.) Subsequently, the State government by a memo dated 13/10/1978 issued instructions to the Chief Engineer in the matter of promotion to the category of Assistant Engineers (Deputy Executive Engineers) from the category of Junior Engineers (Assistant Executive Engineers). The said memo reads as under: