Hyderabad High Court rules sacking of AMVIs illegal
Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court has ruled that the sacking of 15 assistant motor vehicle inspectors (AMVI) out of 169 AMVIs by erstwhile united AP government is illegal. A division bench comprising Justice V. Ramas-ubramanian and Justice G. Shyam Prasad allowed the petitions of 15 AMVIs challenging the termination of services and questioning the action of the government in constituting second medical board for physical examination of the selected candidates.
The aggrieved AMVIs claimed that they were removed from the service by the government based on the opinion of the second medical board and the officers committee. The AP Public Service Commission has selected 169 candidates including the 15 aggrieved AMVIs in March 2012 and sent them for trained. While they were being training, some aspirants moved the AP Administrative Tribu-nal alleging that persons, who did not meet physical measurements, were also appointed.
While admitting their petitions, the Tribunal directed the government to send the selected candidates for re-medical examination by constituting a medical board comprising experts from Gandhi Hospital and Osmania Hospital. Based on the direction, the government constituted the second medical board on July 13, 2012 and the same day re-medical examination of all selected candidates was conducted. The board found that 83 candidates were ineligible for the post of AMVI. The government constituted a committee with two senior officers to examine the board’s report.
While agreeing with fin-dings of the board, the committee informed the government that the app-ointment of only 15 candidates out of 83 (who were found unfit by the board earlier) invalid. Based on the recommendation, the government fired 15 AMVIs. After perusing the entire dispute the bench ruled that “the constitution of the second Medical Board, especially when the entire exercise undertaken by the APPSC never became suspect, was completely uncalled for. Once this is clear, all consequential actions taken by the official respondents would also be illegal.”