APHC010538112025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 28122/2025 Between: 1. SANDIREDDY VASUDEV, S/O CHITTAIAH, AGED 39 YEARS, OCC UN-EMPLOYEE, R/O D.NO. 1-77-0/A, NAGULAPADU, PEDANANDIPADU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEE, REP.BY MEMBER CONVENOR, D.E.O., GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR. 4. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, COLLECTORATE COMPOUND, 0PP. R AND B QUARTERS, GUNTUR - 522004. 5. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, GUNTUR DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE COMPOUND, 0PP. R AND B QUARTERS, GUNTUR - 522004GUNTUR. 2 ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 toPleased to issue a writ, order, or, direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not selecting the petitioner to the post of Telugu Language-1 in Municipal Schools under visually impaired and considering his case under EWS category is arbitrary illegal and in violation of Article 14,16, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and to issue a consequential direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for the appointment to the post of schools Assistant Telugu Language-1 under the bench mark category of visually impaired in Municipal Schools, and to pass IA 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 Pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for selection to the vacant post of school Assistant Telugu Language under visually impaired category in Municipal School forth with and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A RAJENDRA BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following: 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.28122 of 2025 O R DE R: This writ petition is filed declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in not selecting the Petitioner to the post of Telugu Language-I in Municipal Schools under Visually Impaired category and considering the case of the Petitioner only under EWS category as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as under: Respondent No.2 issued notification No.01/Mega DSC- TRC-1/2025 dated 20.04.2025 inviting applications from the eligible candidates to the post of School Assistant for languages and non-languages, physical education and Secondary Grade Teacher under the management of Government, Zilla Parishad, Mandal Parishad, Municipality Schools, Municipal Corporation Schools, Tribal Welfare Ashram Schools, Department for Differently Abled and Juvenile Welfare Department schools. In 4 the said notification, one post was reserved for ‘VH’ category in Municipal schools. 3. The Petitioner, having the benchmark disability, had applied for the post of School Assistant Telugu in Guntur District and had specified in the application that the Petitioner is Visually Impaired with disability of above 70%. In the coloumn for ‘caste’, the Petitioner mentioned as ‘OC’ and eligible for EWS. In the examination conducted, the Petitioner got 38.31 marks and secured rank of 860. 4. As the case of the Petitioner was not considered on account of the merit and the rank secured, the Petitioner had approached the Zonal Level Grievance Redressal Committee constituted and an order was passed on 15.10.2025 stating that the Petitioner belongs to ‘OC’ EWS category and that there are no roster points of EWS in the vacancy. It is also stated that the horizontal reservation for the notified post of PH VH will be filled in the next DSC. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. 5. In the counter affidavit filed by Respondent No.5, it is stated that Petitioner had declared himself as EWS in his online 5 application and VH under horizontal reservation. There were no EWS roster points under Municipal Management in the present recruitment cycle, hence, the case of the Petitioner could not be adjusted under EWS-VH category due to non-availability of corresponding vertical roster point. It is also stated that as per G.O.Ms.No.77, the VH slot cannot be migrated to OC-General vertical and it must be carry forwarded to the next cycle if unfilled. It is stated that the Petitioner is attempting to derive dual benefit by seeking adjustment under both EWS and OC vertical categories and having opted for EWS and VH (horizontal) in his application, the Petitioner cannot now claim migration to OC-VH as there are no roster points available. Such category shifting is expressly barred under the interlocking reservation scheme contained in G.O.Ms.No.77, dated 02.08.2023, which mandates that horizontal reservation shall operate within the respective vertical category. An illustration is also mentioned in the counter affidavit. Additional counter affidavit was also filed on 24.12.2025 reiterating the very same contentions. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that one post is reserved for ‘Visually Impaired’ for the post of School Assistant in Municipal Schools and there is no rationale in rejecting the case 6 of the Petitioner. It is further contended that the Petitioner was referred to Medical Board for determining the Bench mark disability and as per the Medical report dated 30.08.2025, the disability of the Petitioner was assessed at 75%. In that view, there is no reason for the Respondents in considering for the said post. 7. Learned Government Pleader for School Education Sri Gurram Ramachandra Rao would submit that though the Petitioner had benchmark disability of 75%, he is not entitled for appointment under OC-VH category as the Petitioner opted under OC-EWS category. It is stated that as there is no post earmarked for EWS, the Petitioner is not entitled for consideration of his case for School Assistant under EWS category. 8. Heard Sri A.Rajendra Babu, learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Government Pleader for School Education. 9. The procedure for filling up vacancies of persons with bench mark disabilities is provided in G.O.Ms.No.77, dated 02.08.2023. The relevant portion i.e. clause (3) (e) of the G.O. is extracted below: 7 (e) Procedure to be followed while filling the vacancies: (ⅰ): Horizontal Reservation cuts across vertical reservation (in what is called inter-locking reservation) and Persons selected against the quota for persons with benchmark Disabilities have to be placed in the appropriate category viz. SC/ST/BC/EWS/Unreserved depending upon the category to which they belong in the roster meant for reservation of SCS/STS/BCS/EWSs. (ii) To illustrate, if in a given year there are two vacancies reserved for the persons with benchmark Disabilities and out of two persons with benchmark disabilities appointed, one belongs to a Scheduled caste and the other belongs to unreserved category, then the SC candidate with benchmark disability shall be adjusted against the SC point in the reservation roster and the unreserved candidate with benchmark disability against unreserved point in the relevant reservation roster. (iii) In case none of the vacancies falls on point reserved for the SCs, the candidate under the benchmark disability belonging to SC shall be adjusted in future against the next available vacancy reserved for SCs. (iv) Since the persons with benchmark disabilities have to be placed in the appropriate category viz. SC/ST/BC/EWS/ Unreserved in the roster meant for reservation of SCs/STs/BCs/EWS, the application form for the post should require the candidates applying under the quota reserved for persons with benchmark disabilities to indicate whether they belong to SC/ST/BC/EWS or Unreserved. Thus, reservation for the PBDs is Horizontal. 8 10. The EWS reservation is meant for unreserved communities only. In the event of person claiming under EWS quota as well as VH bench mark disabilities, the said individual can be considered even under the unreserved general category vacancy and the version of respondents that the Petitioner would be considered only after the vacancy is earmarked for EWS is unsustainable. This is akin to SC or ST person who is entitled to be appointed on own merit or under reserved quota. 11. In that view, the stand of the Respondents cannot be sustained and the Petitioner is entitled for consideration for appointment to the post of School Assistant under OC-VH category in Municipal schools. 12. The writ petition is therefore allowed and the Respondents are directed to consider the case of the Petitioner for appointment under visually impaired OC-VH as School Assistant in Municipal Schools as expeditiously as possible. No order as to costs. 9 As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand dismissed. ___________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 31.12.2025 KLP