IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

:PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

AND

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

IA No. 2 OF 2023

IN

WA NO: 715 OF 2023

Between:

• 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Fisheries Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati.
• 2. The Commissioner of Fisheries, , Government of Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada, NTR District.
• 3. The District Collector, Newly formed Kakinada District from Erstwhile East Godavari District, Kakinada
• 4. The Joint Director of Fisheries, of newly formed Kakinada District from Erstwhile East Godavari District, Kakinada.

...Petitioners/Appellants (Petitioner in WA 715 OF 2023) on the file of High Court)

$[3480]$

言可含

AND

MOHAMMAD NAFEEZA SULTANA, D/o Mohammad Rahman, aged 21 years, R/o 34-21-1, Pardhasaradhi Nagar, Mandapeta, East Godavari District ...Respondent/Petitioner

(Respondents in-do-)

Counsel for the Petitioner :GP for Village and Ward Secretariats Counsel for the Respondent : Sri MASTAN VALI SHAIK

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of orders dated 04.05.2023 passed in W.P.No. 9222 of 2020 Pending disposal of WA No. 715 of 2023, on the file of the High Court.

The court while directing issue of notice to the Respondents herein to show cause as to why this application should not be complied with, made the following order. (The receipt of this order will be deemed to be the receipt of notice in the case).

ORDER

"1. We have heard the submissions of the learned Government Pleader for Village & Ward Secretariats representing the appellants and the learned counsel representing the sole respondent.

2. The learned Government Pleader for the appellants has drawn the attention of this Court to page No.144 of the Writ Appeal, which is the screenshot of the webpage and pointed out the publication of addendum whereby the authorities amended the qualification of Intermediate with Biology/Vocational Course in Fisheries notified in the notification dated 26.07.2019 and by the amendment, the word "Biology" was deleted and retained the qualification Intermediate with vocational course in Fisheries.

3. It is the case of the respondent that no such addendum was published and that the amendment to the recruitment rules only came to be notified on 21.11.2019 and hence the same is inapplicable. The challenge in the writ petition is not to the addendum, but on this ground, the selection/appointing authority has no right to change the eligibility criteria in the midway after the process for selection has been commenced. In other words, the learned counsel would contend that the

rules cannot be changed in the midway after the process for selection has been commenced.

4. In the case on hand, it appears that the last date for submitting the applications was 10.08.2019, the applicant (respondent herein) submitted her application only on 31.07.2019 and the addendum published on the webpage on 29.07.2019 that is much before the applicant (respondent herein) could submit her application.

5. Mere issuance of a hall ticket allowing the applicant (respondent herein) to sit for an examination or verification of testimonials does not automatically make the applicant eligible if she does not meet the eligibility criteria. Since there was no challenge to the notification of the addendum, it is not open for the respondent to contend that the selection/appointing authority did not have the right to change the eligibility criteria.

6. Needless to say, it is no longer res integra that deciding the eligibility criteria is the sole domain of the appointing authority. The appointing authority changed the eligibility criteria even before the respondent submitted her application. The same criteria applicable to all candidates and not discriminatory in nature. However, the learned single Judge considered the case of the respondent granting prayer in the writ petition.

7. Hence, prima facie, this Court deems it just and appropriate to grant interim suspension of the order impugned in the Writ Appeal and accordingly, this interlocutory application is ordered."

Sd/- K. J. RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

$\mathsf{For}$

SECTION OFFICER

To,

• 1. Mohammad Nafeeza Sultana, D/o Mohammad Rahman, aged 21 years, R/o 34-21-1, Pardhasaradhi Nagar, Mandapeta, East Godavari District( By RPAD)
• 2. One CC to SRI. GP for Village and Ward Secretariats Advocate [OPUC]
• 3. One CC to SRI. MASTAN VALI SHAIK Advocate [OPUC]
• 4. Two spare copies.

psk

HIGH COURT

GN,J & HN,J

DATED:02/04/2024

LIST IN USUAL COURSE

ORDER

IA No. 2 OF 2023 IN WA NO: 715 OF 2023

INTERIM SUSPENSION