LawforAll

advocatemmmohan

My photo
since 1985 practicing as advocate in both civil & criminal laws

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - SHARE THE KNOWLEDGE

Saturday, September 12, 2020

whether the petitioner is a local candidate in terms of the Presidential Order of the year 1975 or she be treated a ‘non-local’.

AP HIGH COURT

Main NumberWP 16100/2020SR NumberWPSR 19859/2020
PetitionerDr.Ayesha FathimaRespondentThe State of Andhra Pradesh
Petitioner AdvocateKALEPU YASHWANTHRespondent AdvocateGP FOR MED HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE



THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.VENKATA RAMANA

WRIT PETITION No.16100 of 2020

ORDER:

 Heard Ravi Teja Padiri, learned counsel representing Sri

Kalepu Yashwanth, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

Government Pleader for Services-III appearing for the respondents.

2. This is an unfortunate case of the petitioner, who is a

resident of Peddapuram in the State of Andhra Pradesh and who

had her education at Yanam and in the State at Pondicherry. She

applied for the post of Civil Assistant Surgeon pursuant to

Notification No.1/2020 dated 16.06.2020. She was awarded marks

at 54.81 by the respondents and which is stated in the provisional

merit list. However, she is treated as ‘non-local’ of the relevant

zone and the clarification whatever offered by the petitioner was

not considered. It is the precise question involved in this matter to

the effect whether the petitioner is a local candidate in terms of

the Presidential Order of the year 1975 or she be treated a

‘non-local’.

3. In the course of hearing, Sri M.Vijaya Kumar, learned

advocate assisted this Court pointing out Para-7 of the above

Presidential Order and its effect.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government

Pleader have no quarrel with reference to application of Para-7 of

the presidential order.

5. Nonetheless, since a request is made on behalf of the

petitioner to permit her to make a detailed representation to the

respondent-Authorities setting out her claim as a native of State of 

Andhra Pradesh and to declare her a local candidate in terms of

Presidential Order, it is desirable to accept the same. However,

learned Government Pleader requested to grant time to get

instructions from the respondent-Authorities in this matter. But

in view of the request by the learned counsel for the petitioner,

even if time is granted to learned Government Pleader to get

instructions in the matter, it may at best help to adjourn this

matter and to protract. Nothing positive would turn out, even if

such time is granted.

6. In the above circumstances, the petitioner is directed to

make a detailed representation of her claim particularly, with

reference to objections raised by the respondent-authorities as set

out in provisional selection list dated 17.08.2020, within a week

from this day. Upon receipt of such detailed representation of the

petitioner, which the respondents should necessarily acknowledge,

they are directed to dispose of the same within ten days therefrom,

assigning clear reasons.

7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

No costs.

Pending miscellaneous petitions if any, shall stand closed.


 _____________________

M.VENKATA RAMANA, J

Date: 10.09.2020

Note:

Issue C.C. today.

B/o.

pab 

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.VENKATA RAMANA

WRIT PETITION No.16100 of 2020

DATE: 10.09.2020 

pab