LexEXECUTIVE OFFICER ETC. ETC. versus E. TIRUPALU AND ORS. ETC. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A EXECUTIVE OFFICER ETC. ETC. v. E. TIRUPALU AND ORS. ETC. ETC. MARCH 26, 1996 B [J.S. VERMA AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.] Se1Vice Law : Timmalu Tirnpati Devasthanams-Appointment of attenders-!nmates C and ex-inmates of Shri Venkateshwara Balamandir eligible for consideration without their names being sponsored by employment exchange-Written test and interview held for selection-Some of ex-inmates not selected filing writ petition claiming appointment 011 the ground of preference-Held, mies do not provide for automatic appointment of inmates/ex-inmates-Candidates who were considered for appointment and not found fit for selection cannot D claim appointment. E Inmates and ex-inmates of Shri Venkateshwara Balamandir, an Orphanage for orphans and destitnde children, established by the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, were eligible for consideration to be appointed in the service of the Devasthanams as per rules of recruitment in vogue, without their names being sponsored by the Employment Ex- change. In the year 1991 there were 297 vacancies for the post of attenders for which 2944 candidates sponsored by the Employment Exchange and 193 candidates being inmates and ex-inmates of the Balamandir, including the respondents, were considered. Selections were made by holding written F test and interview, and 53 inmates/ex-inmates of the Balamandir were selected besides the other candidates. The respondents, who were ex-inmates of the Balamandir and could not be selected, filed writ petitions before the High Court claiming that they ought to have been treated at par with the inmates and given G preference in appointment under the Devasthanams. The stand of the Devasthanams was that there could not be any automatic employment given to all the inmates and ex-inmates and the rules only provide that amo,ngst the equals, inmates would be given preference. The High Court allowed the writ petitions. Aggrieved, the Devasthanams filed the present H appeals. 904 EXECUTIVE OFFICER v. E. TIR UP ALU [KIRP AL, J .] 905 Allowing the appeals, this .court HELD : 1. The High Court erred in issuing .the direction which had the effect of granting appointment to the· respondent even though they were considered but were not found to be lit for selection. In the circumstances, no relief could have been granted to the respondents. [911-D-E] 2. The very fact that interviews for selection of attenders were held shows that the suitability of the candidates for appointment had to be judged and that appointment of the inmates/ex-inmates was not automatic. : [911-B]: A B 3. On the facts of the present case, the distinction between inmates C and ex-inmates of the Balamandir loses all relevance because out of the 193 inmates/ex-inmates considered for appointment 53 were selected; and in comparison to th~ candidates who were selected, the respondents were obviously not found to be ·equally me~itorious. (911-B-C] CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal Nos. 4507· D .4514 of 1996 Etc. Etc. From the Judgment and Order dated 17.11.94 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in W.P .. Nos. 13123, 20032, 20161, 20499, 18205, 12498/93, 16449/94 and 7927 of 1992. ' ' A. Subba Rao for the Appellants . . L.N.· Rao, T,N. Rao, V. Jagapahti, S. Udaya Kr. Sagar and Ms. Suman Bala Rastogi for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KIRPAL, J. ,The Tiruinala Tirupati Devasthanams, the appellant herein, started Sri Venkateshwara Balamandir which is an Orphange for orphans and destitute children for providing free boarding, lodging, cloth- E F ing and education upto the age of 18 years so as to enable them to· acquire good education and get employment. According to lhe appellants when an G inmate/ex.inmate of the Balamandir is qualified and eligible to a post in Devasthanams, he is considered along with other inmates as per the rules of recruitment in vogue. The Executive Officer of the Devasthanams on 23.4.1980 recorded· proceedings, inter alia, to the effect that every Balamandir candidate should be given maximum .education and when he H 906 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) 3 S.C.R. A has completed the same, he should be provided with the employment in Devasthanams as a matter of rou[ine without reference to employment Exchange. It was further recorded that till they are given jobs in Devas- thanams, they will be continued in the Balamandir. At the request of the appellant,· the Government
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.