B a IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAV (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 12990 OF 2025 Between: Pobakula Sreenivasulu, C/o. Pobukula Sai Baba, Aged around 44 R/o 23-1-223, Sagilam vari Street, Church opposite, Rythu Bazar, Nellore Andhra Pradesh years. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary, School Education Department, AP Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati 2. The Commissioner of School Education, Department of School Education Ibrahimpatnam, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh 3. The Director of the School Education, Department of School Education Ibrahimpatnam, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of the writ of MANDAMUS declaring the Rule 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Teacher Recruitment Test (AP TRT) Rules for the posts of Principals, Post Gradate Teachers, Trained Graduate Teachers, Physical Directors and Physical Education teachers Scheme of Selection of Rules, 2025 (impugned rules) notified vide GoMs No. 16 School Education (Services-1) Department dated 19 04.2025 issued by the Respondent Np;4, whereby a common age for the all the posts of teachers has been hi^ifi^ without regards to the nature of duties, their method of recruitment and, consequential appointment as being arbitrary violative of the -fundamental rights of the Petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same by directing the Respondents to accdpt the candidature of the Petitioner herein by considering the age criteria for the post of Principal from 35-50 years by making necessary to amendments/modification/revision to the impugned rules. 4 ' i' - lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 permit the Petitioner herein to apply and consequently participate in the recruitment process for the post of Principal in various schools through Teacher Recruitment Test- Mega DSC 2025 notified vide Notification No.02/Mega DSC-TRC-1/2025 dated 20.04.2025 issued by the Respondent No.1 through Respondent No.3 without reference to the criteria as prescribed under Rule 11 of the Andhra Pradesh Teacher Recruitment Test (AP TRT) Rules for the posts of Principals, Post Gradate Teachers, Trained Graduate Teachers, Physical Directors and Physical Education teachers Scheme of Selection of Rules, 2025. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI S.V.S.S.SIVA RAM Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: ORDER age 1 HCJ & RRR,J W.P. No. 12990/2025 APHC010256092025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3446] THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 12990/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER Pobakula Sreenivasulu AND ...RESPONDENT(S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.CKR ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GPFOR SERVICES II The Court made the following Order: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Heard Sri S.V.S.S. Siva Ram, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and learned G.P. for Services-ll, appearing for the respondents. The petitioner herein was appointed as a Post Graduate Teacher in A.P Model School, Seetharampuram, SPSR Nellore District, by way of 2. proceedings, dated 22.12.2019. 2 % HCJ & RRR,J W.P.No. 12990/2025 3. The Government of A.P. issued The Andhra Pradesh Teacher Recruitment Test Rules for the posts of Principals, Post Graduate Teachers (PGTs), Trained Graduate Teachers (TGTs), Physical Directors (PDs) and physical Education Teachers (PET) Scheme of Selection Rules, 2025 (for short ‘the Rules’) by way of G.O.Ms.No.16, dated 19.04.2025. On the next day, i.e., on 20.04.2025, Notification No.02/MEGA DSC-TRC-1/2025 , was issued for recruitment of Principals, Post Graduate Teachers and other Teachers specified in the notification. This notification, also stipulated that only persons, who are not less than 18 years of age and not more than 44 years of age, as on 01.07.2024, would be eligible for recruitment for any of the posts set out in the notification. Certain relaxations were given in terms of maximum age, to the persons belonging to SC/ST/BC/EWS categories as also the persons with bench mark disabilities. Rule 11, of the Rules also specified the same age limits. 4. It may also be noted that the Government had earlier issued a notification, dated 12.02.2024, by way of G.O.Ms.No.12, dated 15.04.2025, for taking up recruitment of same posts. However, this notification stood cancelled after applications had been received. The notification, dated 20.04.2025, permitted candidates, who had applied under the earlier notification to re-apply for the same post without any payment. However, payment of fees would become necessary, if a candidate was applying for a different post. 3 4 HCJ & RRR,J W.P.No.12990/2025 The petitioner herein, after applying for the post of Principal under the earlier notification, had sought to challenge the age limits, by way of W.P.No.7949 of 2024, before this Court. By way of an interlocutory order, dated 02.04.2024, a Division Bench of this Court, had permitted the petitioner to participate in the selection process, despite crossing the age of 44 years. The petitioner has again challenged the age limits set out in Rule 11 of the Rules, as well as the condition of eligibility set out in the notification. 5. 6. dated 20.04.2025. The main contention of the petitioner is that though applications have been sought for appointment to different categories of posts, the age limit for all the posts, specified in the notification, is the same and such a uniform stipulation is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of 7. India. Sri S.V.V.S.S. Siva Ram, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would contend that the minimum qualification for applying for the post of Principal is 5 years experience, as a Post Graduate Teacher. Such qualification cannot be obtained by a person, who has just crossed the age of 18 years and obviously different age limits would have to be fixed for different posts. The learned counsel would urge this Court, to strike down the condition in the notification, as well as Rule 11 of the Rules, on the ground that the same age limits could not have been prescribed for different kinds of posts. 8. 4 c HCJ & RRR,J W.P.No. 12990/2025 The petitioner is said to have crossed the age of 44 years before 01.07.2024 and consequently, became ineligible for being considered for the 9. post of Principal. The question of whether the same age limit could be prescribed for different posts is appropriate or not, does not assist the case of the petitioner. Any prescription as to the minimum or maximum age would, by its very nature, be arbitrary as there would always be a contrary view as to what should be the minimum and maximum age for appointment to any post. A challenge to such an age limit would have to arise on account of a difficulty faced by a person applying for such post or the violation of a statutory provision on account of fixation of such an age limit. In the present case, a person can be appointed as a Post Graduate Teacher by the age of 25 or so. The further requirement of 5 years experience as a Post Graduate Teacher can be completed by the age of 30 years. Thereafter, such a candidate would have another 14 years to seek appointment as a Principal. The age limit of 44 years, for being appointed as a Principal, gives ample scope and opportunity for a candidate to obtain the required experience as a Post Graduate Teacher. We do not find any arbitrariness in fixation of maximum age limit of 44 years for general candidates and 49 years for the persons belonging to the SC/ST/BC/EWS categories. Fixation of such age limit cannot be treated to be a limitation on 10. 11. 5 HCJ & RRR,J W.P.No. 12990/2025 the acquisition of necessary experience and qualification to be appointed as a Principal. 12. The contention of the petitioner that fixating the maximum age limit of 44 years, for all the other categories of posts, would somehow amount to discrimination against the candidates applying for the post of Principal, cannot be accepted for the aforesaid reasons. 13. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any shall stand closed. Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// OFFICER SEC To, 1. One CC to Sri S.V.S.S. Siva Ram, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCS to GP for Services-ll, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 3. Three CD Copies. ssb HIGH COURT DATED:08/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.12990 of 2025 DISMISSING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS