ORDER : Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad, J. Heard Sri G. Raju, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri P.V. Krishnaiah, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners in W.P.Nos.17331 & 17335 of 2019, Smt. Kavitha Gottipati, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.2197 of 2020, Sri G. Arun Showri, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners in W.P.Nos.17332 of 2019 & 12044 of 2020, Sri Nagaraju Naguru, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner in W.P.No.39729 of 2022, and Sri Raja Babu, Learned Counsel appearing for the Official Respondents. 2. The central issue that falls for consideration in this batch of Writ Petitions is whether the Degrees obtained in Pharmacy Courses (Under Graduation, Post Graduation and Doctorate) can be treated as an integral part of the generic subject of ‘Sciences’ for the purpose of securing the post of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II) as per Para No.3 (Educational Qualifications) of the Notification No.3/2019 dated 26.07.2019. Facts Submitted by The Ld. Counsel For The Petitioners: 3. The Government of Andhra Pradesh (Municipal Administration Department) issued Notification No.3/2019 on 26.07.2019 for filling up 3,648 vacancies for the posts of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretaries (Grade-II). Para No.3 of the said Notification had prescribed Educational Qualifications as: “Any Graduate in Sciences or Environmental Engineering and above”. All the Writ Petitioners herein have completed either Graduation, Post Graduation or Doctorate in Pharmacy. The scheme of examination has been prescribed in terms of Annexure-II of the Notification, which consists of two parts, namely: ‘Part-A’ dealing with General Studies and Mental Ability (50 Questions for 50 Marks); and, ‘Part-B’ dealing with subject papers (100 Questions for 100 Marks). ‘Part-A' has prescribed syllabus relating to Mental Ability, Language Comprehension etc. The syllabus prescribed for ‘Part-B’ includes subjects of : (i) Life Sciences, (ii) Bio-Chemistry, (iii) Micro-Biology, (iv) Environmental Engineering, (v) Solid Waste Management, and, (vi) Liquid Waste Management. 4. Writ Petitioners herein have gone through the stages of taking the ‘Part-A’ & ‘Part-B’ Examinations. All candidates have secured qualifying marks in the examinations. It is pertinent to mention herein that up to the stage of examinations, everything is common for the total number of vacancies of 3,648. It is also pertinent to mention herein that in Para-1.8 of the Notification No.3/2019, dated 26.07.2019, breakup of vacancies for each District has been provided. All candidates have secured qualifying marks in the examinations. It is pertinent to mention herein that up to the stage of examinations, everything is common for the total number of vacancies of 3,648. It is also pertinent to mention herein that in Para-1.8 of the Notification No.3/2019, dated 26.07.2019, breakup of vacancies for each District has been provided. Therefore, basing on the rank of each individual and the options given by the successful candidates as regards the Districts, the Call Letters were issued by the Competent Authority of each District separately namely the District Selection Committee – 2019 (DSC-2019). Under these circumstances, it is needless to state that several of the Writ Petitioners may have received Call Letters from more than one DSC-2019. 5. However, some of the DSCs have declined to issue Call Letters to such persons who possess qualifications/degrees relating to the subject of ‘Pharmacy’ by stating that such qualifications/degrees do not come under the purview of ‘Sciences’. 6. During this time, some of the DSCs have not only issued Call Letters but have also issued Appointment Orders to some of the Writ Petitioners who possessed degrees only in Pharmacy Courses. 7. On account of the action of the DSCs of some Districts refusing to consider candidature of the Writ Petitioners on the basis that the qualifications that they possess do not come under the purview of “Sciences”, they have approached this Court by filing various Writ Petitions during the years 2019 and 2020. In the said Writ Petitions, this Court had granted certain Interim Orders. 8. Due to the fact that some of the candidates have approached this Court, the Competent Authority has issued Show Cause Notices to such of those persons who were already appointed and posted to various places and had been working as such as Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretaries (Grade-II). In fact, some of the candidates (Writ Petitioners) have even successfully completed two years of the prescribed probation period as well by the time they have received the Show Cause Notices for Termination on the ground that the Writ Petitioners do not possess the required qualification. Such persons too have approached this Court in the year 2022. 9. In fact, some of the candidates (Writ Petitioners) have even successfully completed two years of the prescribed probation period as well by the time they have received the Show Cause Notices for Termination on the ground that the Writ Petitioners do not possess the required qualification. Such persons too have approached this Court in the year 2022. 9. Under these circumstances, this Court has to decide the Writ Petitions under various factual combinations while the core question being common in all the Writ Petitions, i.e., whether the qualifications possessed by the Writ Petitioners could be treated as an integral part of the generic subject of ‘Sciences’ as mentioned in the Notification No.3/2019, dated 26.07.2019? 10. For deciding the above question, certain attendant factors and facts would also be relevant and therefore, such facts will have to be brought on record. The following year also the Government has issued a similar notification bearing Notification No.3/2020, dated 10.01.2020. Notification No.3/2019 and Notification No.3/2020 are almost identical. However, insofar the Notification No.3/2020, dated 10.01.2020 is concerned, on the same date, the Government of Andhra Pradesh has issued an Errata to Para No.3 of the Notification No.3/2020. Since this has relevance, the Errata which is short and crisp, is extracted hereunder: ERRATA TO PARA-3 OF NOTIFICATION NO.03/2020, DT. 10.01.2020 GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT Sl.No. Name of the Post Educational qualification in Para No.3 of Notification No.03/2020, Dt.10.01.2020 ERRATA TO Educational Qualifications mentioned in Para No.3 of Notification No.03/2020, Dt. 10.01.2020 1 Ward Sanitation & Environment Secretary, Grade-II A Graduate In Sciences Or Environmental Sciences And Above Namely, Bachelor Of Science/Bachelor Of Science (Hons) [B.Sc/B.Sc (Hons), Master Of Science (M.Sc), In The Disciplines Of Sanitation Sciences, Biotechnology, Micro-biology, Environmental Science, Botony, Zoology, Biosciences.” A Graduate in Sciences or Environmental Sciences and above namely, Bachelor of Science/Bachelor of Science (Hons) [B.Sc/B.Sc (Hons), Master of Science (M.Sc), in the disciplines of Sanitation Sciences, Biotechnology, Micro-biology, Environmental Science, Botony, Zoology, Biosciences, Pharm D, M. Pharm, B. Pharm, B. Pharm (Ayu).” Sd/- Vijay Kumar G.Srkr Commissioner & Director for C&DMA 11. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners have further submitted that all the Petitioners were provisionally selected for the post of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II) and were called for Certificate Verification; that the Petitioners have uploaded their Certificates and have personally presented themselves on various dates for physical verification etc.; that the Competent Authority (respective DSC) has issued Appointment Orders to some of the Writ Petitioners and have posted them in the respective places; that the Competent Authority has declared the probation of some of the Writ Petitioners, who were appointed through various District Selection Committees, 2019 since the candidates have completed two years of service and passed the prescribed Departmental Test, and on completion of Verification of Antecedents; that when some DSCs have not considered B. Pharmacy/M. Pharmacy Graduates for the post of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II), they have approached this Court where this Court passed an Interim Order directing the Official Respondents to reserve the post of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II) while filling up the posts pursuant to Notification No.3/2020, dated 10.01.2020 till the finalization of the Writ Petitions. This Interim Order was granted on 28.04.2022; that while this being so, the candidates who were appointed by some of the District Selection Committees of 2019, have received Show Cause Notices from the Competent Authority seeking reasons as to why their services should not be discontinued for not having proper qualification as per Notification No.3/2019. Submissions of Ld. Government Pleader: 12. Sri Raja babu, Learned Government Pleader appearing for the Official Respondents has drawn the attention of this Court to the contents of two Counter Affidavits filed by them dated 23.08.2021 and Counter Affidavit (additional) dated 05.09.2023. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the Proceedings of the University Grants Commission, published in the Official Gazette of India on 05.07.2014, and would submit that Sciences, as they appear, do not include Pharmacy. He would also submit that the B. Pharmacy is shown in Sl.No.109 that falls under Medicine & Surgery/Ayurveda/Unani/Homeopathy/Health & Allied Sciences/Paramedical/Nursing. Learned Counsel would also contend that the Writs filed against Show Cause Notices are not maintainable. 12.1. He would also submit that the B. Pharmacy is shown in Sl.No.109 that falls under Medicine & Surgery/Ayurveda/Unani/Homeopathy/Health & Allied Sciences/Paramedical/Nursing. Learned Counsel would also contend that the Writs filed against Show Cause Notices are not maintainable. 12.1. He has relied on various Judgments to contend that the judicial review under Article 226 is very limited when it comes to academic matters and also that the Writ Petitioners did not apply under the Notification No.3/2020, dated 10.01.2020 whereas, a specific clarification has been given by way of Errata dated 10.01.2020 to include Pharmacy as an integral part of Sciences only for the recruitment year 2020 and the same cannot be applied by analogy, for the recruitment year 2019. He would submit that the Notification No.3/2019 did not contain an Errata and therefore, what is explicit (as per Errata) under Notification No.3/2020 cannot, by analogy, be applied to the candidates under Notification No.3/2019. 12.2. Sri Raja Babu, Leaned Government Pleader appearing for the Official Respondents, in support of his submissions, have cited a job chart to indicate the nature of roles and responsibilities of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II) and would submit that the Pharmaceutical Graduates would not fit into the roles and responsibilities which are to be performed by Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretaries (Grade-II). 12.3. Learned Government Pleader has drawn the attention of this Court to various Judgments. He also cited a Judgment rendered by a Learned Single Judge in W.P.No.16386 of 2019, dated 22.10.2019 to submit that a person who had appeared for the Written Test and got selected but appointment has been rejected at the time of Certificate Verification on the ground that the candidate does not possess requisite Educational qualification, would have no vested right to be considered. He has also referred to the Judgment of the Learned Single Judge in W.P.No.6833 of 2012 and Batch dated 09.05.2012 (Sri K. Devara and Ors. Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.). Learned Counsel has cited this Judgment for the proposition that the Educational Qualifications and its percentage, being an academic issue and within the purview of the recruiting agency, the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, may not interfere with the same and that the prescription of eligibility qualifications is within the realm of the Recruiting Agency (Para Nos.42 and 43 of the said Judgment). 12.4. 12.4. He has also cited a Judgment in Unni Krishnan and Ors. Vs. Union of India : 2023 SCC 343 . Learned Counsel has placed reliance on Para No.13 of the said Judgment to state that it is a settled law that Court would not prescribe the qualifications and equivalence of a Course. RE-JOINDER: 13. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners, in the Re-joinder, has drawn the attention of this Court to an important clarification obtained by them by way of Right to Information Act from the University Grants Commission (UGC). Under the Right to Information Act, Writ Petitioners has sought clarification as under: “Qus: As per UGC Research XII plan guidelines (2012-2017) for Major Research Project and schedule for Mid-Term evaluation of Major Research Projects published on 10.01.2014. Can pharmacy (pharmaceutical sciences) be included in sciences? Ans: “As per the guidelines mentioned in this Pdf, pharmacy is included in sciences”. (emphasis supplied) 14. This Reply from the U.G.C was received by the RTI Applicant on 02.10.2020. This RTI query and the Reply are filed by the Petitioners in W.P.No.12044 of 2020 under Memo dated 22.03.2021. The other information received under RTI Query would also show that the Municipal Corporations of Kakinada and Municipal Corporation of Rajahmundry have accepted successful candidates in the examination who had various Pharmacy Degrees (Under Graduation, Post Graduation and Doctorate). 15. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners have adverted to the Notification of the University Grants Commission published in the Government of India Gazette on 05.07.2014, which has been relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the Official Respondents, and would submit that the purpose of issuing of this Notification by University Grants Commission is spelt-out in the first two paragraphs of the said publication itself. The same is usefully reproduced hereunder: “PART III-SEC.4] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA, JULY 5, 2014 (ASADHA 14, 1936) 2987 UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION SPECIFICATION OF DEGREES NEW DELHI, March, 2014 NO. F. 5-1/2013 (CPP-II)—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-Section (3) of Section 22 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 (3 of 1956) and in supersession of all earlier Gazette Notifications pertaining to specification of degrees, the University Grants Commission (UGC) with the approval of the Central Government hereby specifies the nomenclature of degree for the purposes of the said section. SPECIFIED DEGREES Broad discipline-wise nomenclatures of degrees at all levels of higher education should be taken as the specified degree, which the universities/institutions must adhere to, are given below. Alongside the nomenclature of the degrees, minimum entry-level qualifications and duration of the programmes have also been indicated. The information is presented in a tabular form for clarity. In the bottom-most row of each table, nomenclatures of degrees that are presently in vogue in some institutions were found to be neither conventional, nor reflective of a real innovation in knowledge and are despecified with the suggestion that the same may be restructured/changed as suggested therein.” 16. The said publication is only with reference to the nomenclature of Degrees and with regard to their use/abuse. Therefore, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners would submit that this gazette publication of the University Grants Commission dated 05.07.2014 would have no relevance to the facts of the present case. 17. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners would submit that the reliance placed by the Government on the Gazette Notification of 5th July, 2014 is not only arbitrary but it is also completely irrational and perverse. It is submitted that the purpose for which the Notification was gazetted on 05.07.2014 has absolutely no connection with the issue on hand. It is further submitted that the initial introduction (preamble) of the said Gazette dated 05.07.2014 itself would indicate that the purpose for which it is issued is only to specify/fix the nomenclature of the Degrees. It should, therefore, not be understood that these are watertight compartments and therefore, as a rule of thumb, there cannot be any deviation in the description given in the Gazette. 18. Reliance has been placed on an Order rendered by a Division Bench of the Patna High Court in The General Manager, State Bank of India Central Recruitment and Promotion Department and Ors. Vs. Sumit Verma and Ors (I.A.No.7165 of 2009 in LPA No.1421 of 2009, dated 15.04.2010). A Letters Patent Appeal bearing L.P.A. No.1421 of 2009 had been preferred by the State Bank of India Central Recruitment and Promotion Department before the Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Patna by assailing an Order passed by a Learned Single Judge dated 16.07.2009 in CWJC No.6580 of 2009. A Letters Patent Appeal bearing L.P.A. No.1421 of 2009 had been preferred by the State Bank of India Central Recruitment and Promotion Department before the Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Patna by assailing an Order passed by a Learned Single Judge dated 16.07.2009 in CWJC No.6580 of 2009. Before adverting to the findings of the Hon’ble Division Bench, it would be necessary to advert to the findings rendered by the Learned Single Judge in his Order dated 16.07.2009 in CWJC.No.6580 of 2009. The relevant portions of the Learned Single Judge’s Order have been extracted by the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Patna High Court in the Letters Patent Appeal at Para No.9. The findings of the Learned Single Judge in his Order dated 16.07.2009, which are relevant for the present purpose, are extracted hereunder: "In my view, a graduate in Computer Application is as much a graduate in Science as a graduate in pure sciences or graduate in Agriculture (B.Sc. Agriculture) or other such graduation degrees. My reasons are two fold. Firstly, if we see the qualification required, it is a graduate in Arts/Science/Commerce. The only thing common between the three courses specified therein is graduation. There is nothing fanciful or special about Arts/Science/Commerce otherwise. Thus, seen the basic requirement is of graduate, which petitioner admittedly is. Secondly, as to whether a graduation course of Computer application is a graduation course in science, in my view, that is so. Graduation in Computer Application is graduation in Science because science is generally understood to include pure or speculative science as well as applied science. For this purpose, I may refer to the definition of science, as given in Advanced Law Lexicon edited by P. Ramanatha Aiyar 3rd Edition, which is quoted hereunder:- Science. The knowledge of many methodically digested and arranged, so as to be attainable by one; a body of principles and deductions to explain the nature of some matter. Vredemburg v. Behan, [33 Wend. (N.Y.) 205] A branch of study that is concerned with observation and classification of facts and specially with the establishment or strictly with the quantitative formulation of verifiable general laws chiefly by induction and hypothesis. [SS. 45 and 57 (13), Indian Evidence Act (1 of 1872) and Art. 80 (3), Const.] “Science”, in its general meaning includes pure or speculative science as well as the applied sciences. (per Ld. MACNAGHTEN, Inl. Rev. [SS. 45 and 57 (13), Indian Evidence Act (1 of 1872) and Art. 80 (3), Const.] “Science”, in its general meaning includes pure or speculative science as well as the applied sciences. (per Ld. MACNAGHTEN, Inl. Rev. V. Forrest, 15 App Cas 353, 354). Looking to the said definition if there be any confusion in the bank that stands removed. Thus, in my considered view, petitioner cannot be said to be nonscience, non-Arts and non-Commerce graduate. What surprises this Court further is two other qualifications that were required were not even seen by the Interview Board. They were knowledge of Computer, the petitioner was graduate in Computer Application, the second was candidates who had degree in Business Management would be preferred, the petitioner had a Post Graduate Degree and was Master in Business Administration, I do not want to speculate why the Interview Board chose not to look into this. In that view of the matter, on this count alone, the writ petition must succeed. The rejection of petitioner’s candidature on the ground of not being a graduate in science is not correct in fact or in law and cannot be sustained….” 19. The Hon’ble Division Bench of the Patna High Court had held in Para Nos.11, 12, 16 & 17 of its Order dated 15.04.2010 in LPA No.1421 of 2009, as under: “11. In the opinion of this court, the authorities of the Bank have adopted a rather myopic view. If such interpretation of science degree is accepted than even a Bachelor of Technology (B. Tech.) or Bachelor in Medicine and Bachelor in Surgery (MBBS) of Bachelor of Pharmacy (B. Pharma) would not be qualifying within the constricted interpretation of degree in science. The discipline of Science, Arts and Commerce in fact are in the form of genus and various degrees in different subject of science are its species and therefore the concept of the officials of the Bank that unless there was a degree of Bachelor in Science (B. Sc.) or Bachelor in Arts (B. A.) or Bachelor in Commerce (B. Com.) the candidate would not be held to be qualified in terms of the advertisement seems to be wholly illogical, if not absurd. In the present scenario where the concept of education course by way of speciality and super speciality has become an established fact, such degrees B. Tech, B. Pharma, M.B.B.S and like wife B.C.A. cannot be held to be beyond the discipline of Science, Arts or Commerce. 12. Learned single Judge therefore in our considered opinion has rightly gone into the full meaning of word ‘Science’ and has also correctly arrived at the conclusion that the B. C. A. is only a science graduate. 16. In the opinion of this court whenever the Government or any Public Sector undertaking including Bank issue an employment notice and undertake selection, the idea is always to select the best qualified and most suitable candidates. If the orthodox and pedantic approach of the Bank is allowed to prevail the well and in better qualified candidates would be eliminated from zone of consideration the whole concept and purpose of right to equality and equal opportunity in public employment guaranteed under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India would be rendered futile. The Apex Court and this Court had repeatedly held that avenues of employment are national wealth and have to be allowed to be explored by the best talented people. 17. Thus, for the reasons indicated above, we would not find any merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.” 20. This apart, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners has also drawn the attention of this Court to a Public Notice on Equivalency of Degrees published by the Secretary of the University Grants Commission vide Proceeding No.F9- 3/2016(CPP-II) dated 19.07.2016. Since this Public Notice also has relevance to the present issue on hand, this Court deems it appropriate to extract the said Notice in its entirety. Prof. Dr. Jaspal S. Sandhu MBBS. MS (Ortho), DSM, FAIS, FASM, University Grants Commission (Ministry of Human Resource Department, Govt. of India) FAFSM, FFMS, FAMS Secretary Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002 Ph: 011-23239337, 23236288, Fax: 011-23238858, email: jssandhu.ugc@nic .In No.F.9-3/2016 (CPP-II) 19th July 2016 PUBLIC NOTICE ON EQUIVALENCY OF DEGREES The University Grants Commission specifies degrees as defined under section 22 of the UGC Act, 1956. of India) FAFSM, FFMS, FAMS Secretary Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi- 110002 Ph: 011-23239337, 23236288, Fax: 011-23238858, email: jssandhu.ugc@nic .In No.F.9-3/2016 (CPP-II) 19th July 2016 PUBLIC NOTICE ON EQUIVALENCY OF DEGREES The University Grants Commission specifies degrees as defined under section 22 of the UGC Act, 1956. Such degrees can be awarded only by a University established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a provisional Act or a State Act or by an Institution Deemed to be University established under Section 3 of the UGC Act, 1956. Equivalence of degrees, diplomas, certificates etc. are not determined by the UGC. In the case of higher education, equivalence is decided by the University concerned and in cases of employment, promotion etc., equivalence is decided by the employing organization. The UGC Act, and Rules and Regulations made thereunder are available on UGC website www.ugc.ac.in. Sd/- (Jaspal S. Sandhu) Secretary 21. If the nomenclature Proceedings of the UGC dated 05.07.2014 and the Public Notice on Equivalency of Degrees dated 19.07.2016 are compared with each other, it makes it clear that what is provided under 05.07.2014 UGC Notification is only with regard to fixation of nomenclature because it has been clearly stated in the Public Notice on Equivalency of Degrees that the UGC never determines equivalency of Degrees, Diplomas and Certificates etc.,. 22. Interim Directions/Orders passed by this Court from time to time: 22.1 : W.P.No.17331 of 2019: Relief is sought by the Writ Petitioners against the Municipalities in not allowing the Petitioners to continue as Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretaries (Grade-II). 22.2: W.P.No.17332 of 2019: Relief is sought by the Writ Petitioners against Municipalities seeking appointment as Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretaries (Grade-II). In the Interim Order dated 06.11.2019, Learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that a clarification is sought for, from the Department of Higher Education as to whether the Degree of B. Pharmacy and B.Sc are one and the same because the Notification is issued for Degree in Sciences. It is also noted in the Interim Order that the Learned Counsel for the Respondents has stated that until clarification is received from the Department, the further process to fill the post of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II), will not be taken up. 22.3: W.P.No.17335 of 2019: Relief is sought by the Writ Petitioner for issuance of posting Orders. It is also noted in the Interim Order that the Learned Counsel for the Respondents has stated that until clarification is received from the Department, the further process to fill the post of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II), will not be taken up. 22.3: W.P.No.17335 of 2019: Relief is sought by the Writ Petitioner for issuance of posting Orders. 22.4: W.P.No.2197 of 2020: Relief is sought by the Writ Petitioners for issuance of Appointment Orders/Posting Orders. In the Interim Order dated 20.10.2022, in I.A.No.1 of 2020, a direction was given to reserve four posts of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretaries (Grade-II) for Petitioner Nos.1 to 4 in their respective Districts and categories as per their marks/merit in the existing vacancies while filling up the posts pursuant to Notification No.3 of 2019, dated 26.07.2019, till the finalization of the Writ Petition. 22.5: W.P.No.12044 of 2020: Relief is sought by the Writ Petitioner for issuance of the Appointment Orders/Posting Orders. In I.A.No.1 of 2020, vide Order dated 28.04.2022, this Court has held as under: “Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and rival contentions advanced by the parties, if the selection process pursuant to notification No.3 of 2020 is completed pending disposal of the writ petition, as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the rights of the petitioner would get adversely affected in case he succeeds in the writ petition, this court finds force in the apprehension ventilated by the petitioner and it is a fit case to protect the interest of the petitioner by giving suitable direction to the respondents 2 to 3, who according to the counsel are the concerned authority. The learned Government Pleader for Services-I, at this juncture, submits that if the Court were to direct the respondents to reserve one post, the same may be subject to availability of the vacancies. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the information available on web site, 294 posts fell vacant as on today. Accordingly, the respondents 2 and 3 are directed to reserve one post of Ward Sanitation & Environment Secretary (Grade II) while filling the posts pursuant to notification No.3 of 2020 dated 10.01.2020, till finalization of the writ petition. Accordingly, this petition is ordered. Accordingly, the respondents 2 and 3 are directed to reserve one post of Ward Sanitation & Environment Secretary (Grade II) while filling the posts pursuant to notification No.3 of 2020 dated 10.01.2020, till finalization of the writ petition. Accordingly, this petition is ordered. No costs.” 22.6: W.P.No.39729 of 2022: Writ Petitioners herein were issued the Appointment Orders on 01.10.2019 and posted the Writ Petitioners at places as per the option exercised by them. Vide G.O.Ms.No.286, dated 07.11.2019, the Official Respondents have framed the Rules as the Andhra Pradesh General Subordinate Service Rules, 2019 and applied the same to all the Municipalities and the Municipal Corporations. Vide Proceeding dated 07.07.2022, the Respondents declared the probation of the Writ Petitioners as being successful after completing two years of service and after passing the prescribed Departmental Test and on completion of verification of antecedents. The Writ Petitioners were put on scale. The Official Respondents have issued Show Cause Notices vide Roc.No.372/2022/A5, dated 23.11.2022 for cancellation of declaration of probation of the Writ Petitioners & Show Cause Notices to Petitioners 1 to 5 & 9 vide Roc.No.1859/2022/A5-2, A5-5, A5-6, A5-4 & A5-1, dated 24.11.2022. Vide Interim Order dated 08.12.2022, this Court has held as under: “While the prescription of qualification for being eligible to aspire for the post of the Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II), are so clear in terms of the Notification No.3 of 2019, dated 26.07.2019 and Errata dated 10.01.2020, in some Districts, Candidates who possess B. Pharmacy degrees were considered and in respect of some Districts, Candidates who possessed similar degree were not considered. Such of those Candidates, who were not considered despite possessing B. Pharmacy approached this Court (in the above two Writ Petitions). The Interim Order of this Court dated 28.04.2022, is also in furtherance of the cause of the present Writ Petitioners. Despite such an Interim Order, the present Show Cause Notice was issued citing that Interim Order as if the purport of the Interim Order were to be against the cause of the Writ Petitioners. This is once again a clear misunderstanding by the Executive. In this view of the matter, this Court deems it appropriate to Stay the Proceedings Bearing Roc.No.372/2022/A5-2, dated 23.11.2022 and Roc.No.1859/2022/A5 dated 24.11.2022, until further orders.” 23. This is once again a clear misunderstanding by the Executive. In this view of the matter, this Court deems it appropriate to Stay the Proceedings Bearing Roc.No.372/2022/A5-2, dated 23.11.2022 and Roc.No.1859/2022/A5 dated 24.11.2022, until further orders.” 23. In the above premise, this Court deems it appropriate to decide the following issues: ISSUES: i. Whether the B. Pharmacy and M. Pharmacy Degrees and Doctorate in Pharmacy can be considered as “Sciences” in terms of Para No.3 of the Notification No.3/2019, dated 26.07.2019? and, ii. Whether the Writ Petitions are maintainable for challenging Show Cause Notices? DISCUSSION: Issue No.1:- Whether the B. Pharmacy and M. Pharmacy Degrees and Doctorate in Pharmacy can be considered as “Sciences” in terms of Para No.3 of the Notification No.3/2019, dated 26.07.2019? 24. As submitted by the Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners, the facts on record would indicate that the initial Notification No.3/2019, dated 26.07.2019 was issued for the purpose of filling up 3,648 vacancies for the post of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II). Para No.3 of the said Notification specifies Educational Qualifications. It states that “Any Graduate in Sciences or Environmental Engineering and above”. The Writ Petitioners herein are either Graduates in Pharmacy or above. ‘Part-B’ (subject paper – 100 questions for 100 marks) includes subjects of Life Sciences, Bio Chemistry, Micro Biology, Environment Engineering, Solid Waste Management and Liquid Waste Management. All the subjects belong to the realm of ‘Science’ in the generic sense. In the subsequent Notification which is issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh bearing Notification No.3/2020, dated 10.01.2020, the Government of Andhra Pradesh has issued an Errata for the post of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II). In the Errata, for the purpose of Para No.3 (dealing with the required Educational Qualifications), the Government has included Pharm D, B. Pharmacy, M. Pharmacy and B. Pharmacy (Ayu) as being eligible for the said post of Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretary (Grade-II). 25. This apart, while examination is common for all the candidates, the District Selection Committee has issued independent Notifications for recruitment for each District basing on the number of vacancies available. Strangely, some of the District Selection Committees have taken a view as in the present case that B. Pharmacy and M. Pharmacy and also Doctorate in Pharmacy are not the qualifications which are contemplated under Para No.3 of the Notification No.3/2019, dated 26.07.2019. Strangely, some of the District Selection Committees have taken a view as in the present case that B. Pharmacy and M. Pharmacy and also Doctorate in Pharmacy are not the qualifications which are contemplated under Para No.3 of the Notification No.3/2019, dated 26.07.2019. Some of the candidates have approached this Court challenging the view taken by the respective District Selection Committees. When this Court had granted interim protection to such candidates, the other District Selection Committees which did not impose restrictions on employment for the B. Pharmacy, M. Pharmacy and Doctorate in Pharmacy candidates, have started issuing Show Cause Notices. The issuance of Show Cause Notices was at a stage when the candidates have completed their probation successfully. 26. The reliance placed by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on the Gazette Notification of UGC dated 05.07.2014 is completely misplaced. It is not only misplaced but irrational that no person of ordinary prudence could ever take such a view that the pharmacy courses do not come under the generic subject of ‘Science’. This view of the Court is fortified by the opinion expressed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of the Patna High Court in the General Manager, State Bank of India Central Recruitment and Promotion Department and Others Vs. Sumit Verma and Others (I.A.No.7165 of 2009 in LPA.No.1421 of 2009) (extracted supra). 27. This apart, this Court takes judicial note of the Reply given by the UGC, under a RTI query, that B. Pharmacy is a ‘Science’. This Court also takes judicial note of the clarification given by the Secretary of the UGC by way of Public Notice dated 19.07.2016 that the UGC would not render any opinion on equivalence of Degrees, Diplomas or Certificates. This Court would place reliance on the Public Notice of the UGC dated 19.07.2016 and also the view expressed by the Division Bench of the Patna High Court in the General Manager, State Bank of India Central Recruitment and Promotion Department and Others Vs. Sumit Verma and Others (I.A.No.7165 of 2009 in LPA.No.1421 of 2009). 28. This Court would place reliance on the Public Notice of the UGC dated 19.07.2016 and also the view expressed by the Division Bench of the Patna High Court in the General Manager, State Bank of India Central Recruitment and Promotion Department and Others Vs. Sumit Verma and Others (I.A.No.7165 of 2009 in LPA.No.1421 of 2009). 28. This Court is also of the opinion that the view taken by the Government of Andhra Pradesh that B. Pharmacy, M. Pharmacy and Doctorate in Pharmacy do not come under the expression ‘Science’ so as to exclude the candidates under Para No.3 of the Notification No.3/2019 is completely perverse inasmuch as no person of ordinary prudence could ever take such a view. In this view of the matter, the view taken by the Government of Andhra Pradesh cannot be sustained. 29. This apart, this issue should be viewed from another angle in view of an Errata which has been issued after issuance of the Notification No.3/2020 i.e., in the following year. It is already discussed hereinabove that for Notification No.3/2020 which was issued on 10.01.2020, the Government has issued Errata on the very same date by including the Qualification/Degrees relating to the subject of Pharmacy for extending eligibility under Para No.3 of the said Notification. If the stand of the Government were to be consistent that the subject of Pharmacy cannot be treated as Science in view of the Gazette Notification of UGC dated 05.07.2014, there was no requirement for the Government to issue an Errata in the following year’s Notification for the purpose of including Qualification/Degrees relating to the subject of Pharmacy. Even in this regard, this Court would hold that there is no consistency with regard to the stand taken by the Government. It has been blowing hot and cold at every stage. This whole pandemonium has been created by the Executive without bestowing its analytical mind on this issue. Even when different DSCs have taken inconsistent views, that was the time that the Authority at the apex level ought to have taken stock of this issue and ought to have given a quietus. It is obvious that there is also a failure on the part of the Authority at the apex level, when this Court notices that each of the District Selection Committee had acted as an island to itself. It is obvious that there is also a failure on the part of the Authority at the apex level, when this Court notices that each of the District Selection Committee had acted as an island to itself. This makes it evident that there is no coordination between the Authorities at the decision-making level and the District Selection Committees at the District level. The prevailing pandemonium ought to have sounded an alarm that calls for immediate intervention by the apex-level Executive for the purpose of giving clarity in a logical and rational manner. It is because of this failure that some DSCs have illogically and irrationally banned the persons with Qualifications relating to the subject of Pharmacy while some of the DSCs have correctly appointed persons with Pharmacy Qualifications and allowed them to work and had even approved probation in several cases. This could have been plainly avoided had the Executive at the Secretary level would have logically and rationally applied its mind and settled the issue. Issue No.2:- Whether the Writ Petitions are maintainable for challenging Show Cause Notices? 30. Insofar as the maintainability of the Writ Petitions challenging Show Cause Notices is concerned, the Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioners have placed reliance on the Gujarat High Court’s Order in Shivcharan Lalchand Bhatiya Vs. Sejal K. Mevada (Special Civil Application No.12250 of 2017 dated 05.04.2018) which is held as under: “12. The abstinence from interference at the stage of issuance of the show-cause notice, in order to relegate the parties to the proceedings before the authority concerned, is the normal rule. However, the said rule is not without exception. Where a show cause notice is issued either without jurisdiction, or is an abuse of the process of law, the Writ Court would not hesitate to interfere even at the stage of issuance of the show-cause notice. This Court has the power to issue, in a fit case, an order prohibiting an authority from acting without jurisdiction. Where such an action of the authority, acting without jurisdiction, subjects or is likely to subject a person to lengthy proceedings, and unnecessary harassment, the High Court would be justified in issuing appropriate orders or directions to prevent such consequences. The exercise of an alternative remedy is not always a sufficient reason for refusing a party relief by a Writ or Order prohibiting an authority, acting without jurisdiction, from continuing such action. The exercise of an alternative remedy is not always a sufficient reason for refusing a party relief by a Writ or Order prohibiting an authority, acting without jurisdiction, from continuing such action. Where the threat of a prejudicial action is wholly without jurisdiction or a gross abuse of the process of law, a person cannot be asked to wait for injury to be cause to him, before seeking the protection of the Court.” 31. This Court, therefore, is of the opinion that for the reasons mentioned hereinabove, a challenge to the Show Cause Notice is maintainable. 32. Accordingly, all these Writ Petitions stand allowed by declaring the impugned actions of the Official Respondents as being illegal and arbitrary besides being illogical and irrational and also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the following directions are issued: i) The Writ Petitioners in W.P.Nos.17331, 17332, 17335 of 2019, 2197 & 12044 of 2020 shall now be issued the Orders of Appointment within a period of four weeks from today, provided, the said Writ Petitioners would satisfy all the other requirements as per the Notification No.3/2019, dated 26.07.2019; and, ii) In W.P.No.39729 of 2022, the Show Cause Notices issued to the Writ Petitioners are hereby set aside as nonest in the eye of law. Accordingly, the Writ Petitioners shall continue as Ward Sanitation and Environment Secretaries (Grade-II). 33. No order as to costs. 34. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order.