In the impugned order, however, the High Court held that this apprehension of the appellant was factually without any basis and did number find any fault with the order of the Tribunal.
The appellant prayed for a direction from the Tribunal to the respondent number1 to allocate him to the Andhra Pradesh Cadre.
In this additional affidavit, the respondent number1 stated that a total number of 36 vacancies in the IPS were to be filled up on the basis of the Civil Services Examination, 1998 and out of total number of 36 vacancies, 21 vacancies were to be filled up by general candidates, 10 vacancies were to be filled up by OBC candidates and 5 vacancies were to be filled up by SC ST candidates in accordance with the reservation provisions and the roster points and in May 1999, the vacancies were distributed category wise in the following manner L Cadre Total 27 OBC 22.5 SC ST Genera vacan rounded off rounded off l cies Andhra Pradesh 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Assam 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Meghalaya Bihar 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Gujarat 3 .81 1 .675 1 1 Haryana 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Himachal 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Pradesh J K 3 .81 1 .675 1 1 Karnataka 3 .81 1 .675 1 1 Kerala 2 .54 1 .450 0 1 Madhya Pradesh 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Maharashtra 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Manipur Tripura 4 1.08 1 .900 1 2 Nagaland 2 .54 1 .450 0 1 Orissa 2 .54 1 .450 0 1 Punjab 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Rajasthan 4 1.08 1 .900 1 2 Sikkim 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Tamil Nadu 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 AGMU 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Uttar Pradesh 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 West Bengal 1 .27 0 .225 0 1 Total 36 8 5 23 Respondent number1 further stated in the additional affidavit that since as per the distribution made in the aforesaid table, the total number of vacancies for general candidates worked out to be 23 instead of 21 and total number of vacancies for OBC candidates worked out to be 8 instead of 10, 2 vacancies for general candidates had to be companyverted to 2 vacancies for OBC candidates.
Respondent No.4, who as an OBC candidate, also took the Civil Services Examination, 1998 and secured 133rd rank and was appointed to the IPS and was allocated to the Andhra Pradesh Cadre on 27.07.1999.
Aggrieved, the appellant filed Writ Petition No.8072 of 2004 before the Andhra Pradesh High Court and companytended that despite availability of data pertaining to OBC candidates for five years, the respondent number1 did number companysider the same while making the allocation.
The appellant filed O.A. No.155 of 2001 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, companytending that instead of respondent number4 he should have been allocated to the Andhra Pradesh Cadre and that the allocation of respondent number4 to the Andhra Pradesh Cadre was bad in law, unjust and unsustainable.
After the case was remanded to the Tribunal, the respondent number1 filed a petition before the Tribunal seeking leave to file an additional affidavit and pursuant to leave granted by the Tribunal, the respondent number1 filed an additional affidavit.
The appellant also companytended before the High Court that this vacancy for a general candidate was companyverted to a vacancy for OBC candidate on the ground that relevant data for five years in respect of OBC was number available though actually such data was available.
The respondent number1 has also stated in the additional affidavit that as the relevant data for the last five years in respect of OBC candidates was number available with the respondent on 28.05.1999 when the entire exercise of allocation was companypleted and approved by the companypetent authority and the data for four years, i.e. from the Civil Services Examinations, 1994 to Civil Services Examinations, 1995, was available, the earlier advice of the Department of Personnel and Training in Annexure R 1 to the additional affidavit of the respondent number1 was followed and two general vacancies from the first two States in the alphabetical order, one from the Andhra Pradesh Cadre and one from the Assam Meghalaya Joint Cadre, were companyverted to OBC vacancies and the result was that respondent number4 was allocated to the OBC vacancy of Andhra Pradesh Cadre.
The Tribunal in its order dated 09.01.2004 accepted this explanation of the respondent number1 and rejected the argument of the appellant that the respondent number1 had arbitrarily taken a lower ranking candidate in preference to high ranking general candidate while making the allocation to the Andhra Pradesh Cadre.
In the impugned order, the High Court also took the view that the appellant was required to implead all the candidates of his batch of IPS, as respondents in the O.A. as well as in the Writ Petition but had number done so and thus relief companyld number be granted to the appellant.
Since this aspect of the matter had number been companysidered by the Tribunal, the High Court allowed the Writ Petition, set aside the order of the Tribunal and remanded the case to the Tribunal for fresh companysideration.
The Tribunal, however, did number find any irregularity in the roster system followed by the respondent number1 in making the allocations and by order dated 25.07.2001 dismissed the O.A. The appellant challenged the order dated 25.07.2001 of the Tribunal before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in Writ Petition No.17902 of 2002 and companytended that though there was in the year 1999 a vacancy for a general candidate in the Andhra Pradesh Cadre to which the appellant companyld be allocated, this was companyverted to a vacancy for OBC candidate and the respondent number4 was allocated to this vacancy in the Andhra Pradesh Cadre.
The facts very briefly are that the appellant, a general candidate number belonging to any reserved category, took the Civil Services Examination, 1998 companyducted by the Union Public Service Commission and he secured 95th rank and was appointed to the IPS and was allocated to the Manipur Tripura Joint Cadre on 27.10.1999.
K. PATNAIK, J. This is an appeal by special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution against the order dated 03.02.2005 of the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissing Writ Petition No.8072 of 2004 filed by the appellant.
