ORDER Pulla Karthik, J.: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief: “…to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned Memo No: 467/ RP- II/2017 dated 09.10.2024 as arbitrary and illegal and set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents to award five weightage marks for the contract service of petitioner from July, 2015 to June, 2017 as Lab Technician at Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad and direct the respondents to consider his case for selection and appointment to the post of Lab Technician Grade-II pursuant to the Notification No.67/2017, dated 18.12.2017 of the third respondent and pass…” 2. Heard Sri Sarasani Sathyam Reddy, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri Sarasani Rahul Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Services-I, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2, and Sri P.S. Rajasekhar, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.3. 3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, belonging to Scheduled Caste community, having possessed the qualification of B.Sc. (MLT), earlier worked as a contract employee in Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, from July, 2015. As such, in pursuance of Notification No.67/2017 dated 18.12.2017, issued by respondent No.3, the petitioner applied for the post of Lab Technician Grade-II, appeared and successfully qualified in the written examination and was thus called for verification of his certificates on 08.08.2023. It is submitted that as per the Notification, out of the total (100) points, a maximum of (70) points were to be awarded for written examination, while (30) points for experience. Therefore, since the petitioner had earlier worked as Lab Technician on contract basis from July, 2015, to June, 2017, he is fully entitled for award of service weightage points. However, he was not awarded the said points, due to which, his selection had affected. As such, the petitioner was constrained to file W.P.No.19077 of 2024 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 19.07.2024, permitting the petitioner to make a representation and the authorities were directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 4. As such, the petitioner was constrained to file W.P.No.19077 of 2024 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 19.07.2024, permitting the petitioner to make a representation and the authorities were directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 4. It is further submitted that in compliance with the said order of this Court, the petitioner submitted his representation to the respondents on 20.07.2024, and his request for awarding service weightage points was illegally and arbitrarily rejected by respondent No.3 vide impugned Memo dated 09.10.2024, holding that the petitioner had only worked as an outsourcing employee, which is factually incorrect, as the petitioner’s earlier appointment order dated 21.05.2025 categorically mentioned that he was appointed as a contract employee. It is also submitted that the Principal, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, issued an experience certificate dated 30.09.2024, which also goes to show that the petitioner had rendered his services as a contractual employee since 2015. As such, the petitioner is fully eligible and entitled for awarding the service weightage points for his contractual service. Therefore, learned Senior Counsel seeks indulgence of this Court to issue necessary directions to the respondents for awarding the service weightage points to the petitioner for his services during July, 2015 and June, 2017. 5. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that the petitioner had produced a certificate issued by the Principal, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, dated 16.07.2018, during the certificate verification process, but it is nowhere mentioned therein that the petitioner had worked as Lab Technician on contract basis. Further, the petitioner had also failed to furnish within the stipulated time, the copies of relevant documents, including his appointment order. Hence, the Committee has awarded zero weightage points to the petitioner and furnished the same to respondent No.3. It is further submitted that after filing of the present writ petition, the relevant records were called for and the Principal, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, vide letter dated 16.11.2024, stated that the petitioner was appointed as Lab Technician Grade-II on a consolidated payment of Rs.18,360/- for a period of one year, from 06.07.2015, which was extended for a further period of one year, until 05.09.2017, and he rendered his contractual services at MDRU Lab under centrally-sponsored scheme by ICMR/DHRU Funds. However, the petitioner’s appointment was not made by a competent authority, i.e., District Selection Committee headed by the District Medical and Health Officer/District Collector, as was done in the cases of other contractual employees, and his consolidated pay was also drawn from centrally-sponsored scheme funds and not from the State Government funds/budget. As such, the petitioner was not awarded any service weightage points. It is also submitted that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste community, and the last selected candidate under the said community secured (43.757) marks, whereas, the petitioner has secured only (41.237) marks. Hence, he is not within the zone of consideration. Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the present writ petition. 6. Likewise, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 submits that in pursuance of Notification No.67/2017 dated 18.12.2017, the petitioner participated in the recruitment process for the post of Lab Technician Grade-II, and as per the Notification, a maximum of (70) points would be awarded for written examination and (30) points for experience, which includes a maximum of (10) points for seniority in terms of passing the qualifying examination and (20) for the Government service on contract basis. It is submitted that Paragraph VIII of the Notification also clearly specified that the weightage of (20) points would be awarded only to the employees working on contractual basis in Government organization. However, a Committee was constituted by the Medical Department, which has declared that the employees working on outsourcing basis are not eligible for awarding the service weightage points, as per the guidelines issued in G.O.Ms.No.166 dated 09.09.2017. 7. It is further submitted that in compliance with the orders of this Court dated 19.07.2024 in W.P.No.19077 of 2024, the case of the petitioner herein was examined by the Commission in detail, and since he was found to be working as an outsourcing employee, his request for award of service weightage points was rightly rejected vide impugned order dated 09.10.2024. It is further submitted that the Director of Public Health and Family Welfare, vide letter dated 09.12.2022, also clarified that the petitioner’s name was included in the list of workers, and that his services come under outsourcing basis. As such, there is no illegality or arbitrariness in rejecting the claim of the petitioner. 8. It is further submitted that the Director of Public Health and Family Welfare, vide letter dated 09.12.2022, also clarified that the petitioner’s name was included in the list of workers, and that his services come under outsourcing basis. As such, there is no illegality or arbitrariness in rejecting the claim of the petitioner. 8. It is further submitted that the selection process for the post of Lab Technician Grade-II in pursuance of Notification No.67/2017 has already been concluded on 09.08.2024, and except the (27) posts, which were reserved as per the interim orders of this Court, only (16) vacancies remained unfilled, and the same were also carried forward to the next recruitment, as per G.O.Ms.No.81 dated 22.02.1997 and G.O.Ms.No.544 dated 04.12.1998, due to non-availability of eligible candidates in certain categories. It is further submitted that respondent No.3 is only a recruiting agency and does not possess the authority to award weightage marks, and thus, the Medical and Health Department and the office of DPH and FW were delegated the authority to award weightage marks. As such, a list of candidates was forwarded to respondent No.3 with service weightage marks awarded to their contractual service, and in pursuance of the same, the selection process was undertaken and concluded. Further, no Scheduled Caste vacancy remained unfilled, and the last selected candidate in the said community secured (43.757) marks, whereas, the petitioner secured only (41.237) marks in the written examination.Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the present writ petition. 9. This Court has taken note of the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the material available on record. 10. Admittedly, respondent No.3 issued Notification No.67/2017 dated 18.12.2017, for recruitment to the post of Lab Technician Grade-II, and Para-VIII deals with the procedure for selection, which reads as under: “PARA-VIII: PROCEDURE FOR SELECTION: THE SELECTION OF CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE POST IS AS FOLLOWS: THE FINAL SELECTION OF THESE POSTS WILL BE BASED ON 70 WEIGHTAGE (POINTS) IN WRITTEN EXAMINATION AND 30 WEIGHTAGE (POINTS) FOR THE GOVT. SERVICE (EXPERIENCE)PUT TOGETHER. The procedure of selection for the post is as follows: Sl.No. Particulars Weightage (Points) 1 Written Examination 70 2 Experience 30 Total: 100 The criteria for awarding Weightage (Marks) for Govt. SERVICE (EXPERIENCE)PUT TOGETHER. The procedure of selection for the post is as follows: Sl.No. Particulars Weightage (Points) 1 Written Examination 70 2 Experience 30 Total: 100 The criteria for awarding Weightage (Marks) for Govt. Service (Experience) is as follows: Criteria Weightage(Marks) Service Consists of Weightage of experience of Govt.Service i) Six Months in Tribal Area ii) Six Months in Rural Area iii) Six Months in Urban Area (Corporations & Grade-IMunicipalities) 4 2 1 As per the Selection of procedure, it consists of Weightage of total 100 points. In which maximum 70 points will be given to Written Examination conducted for 150 marks and maximum 30 points will be given to Experience of the candidates based on their Government Service. 1. Those candidates who qualify in the Examination in order of merit will be called for verification of Certificates, Community and Category wise for the vacancies available as required. The minimum qualifying marks for Selection are OCs 40%, BCs 35% SCs, STs and PH 30%. The minimum qualifying marks are relaxable in the case of SC/ST/BC/PH at the discretion of the Commission. 2. The candidates will be selected and allotted to Service/ Department as per their rank in the merit list and as per Department and District Preference for allotment of candidates against vacancies and for the vacancies available. N.B.: Mere securing minimum qualifying marks does not vest any right in a candidate for being considered for selection. 3. The appearance in all the paper/papers at the Written Examination as per rules is compulsory. Absence in any of the paper/papers will automatically render his candidature asdisqualified. 4. Candidates have to produce Original documents and other particulars on the day of verification itself. If candidate fails to produce any of the required certificates and if the particulars furnished by him / her in the Application do not tally with the Original documents produced him / her, then his / her candidature will be rejected/disqualified without any further correspondence. As candidature for the recruitment is processed through Computer/Electronic devices based on the particulars furnished in the Application Form, the candidate is advised to fill in all the relevant particulars carefully. 5. As candidature for the recruitment is processed through Computer/Electronic devices based on the particulars furnished in the Application Form, the candidate is advised to fill in all the relevant particulars carefully. 5. The preference opted by candidates in respect of posts, District etc., in the application form are only indicative for being considered to the extent possible but not binding or limiting the Commission’s powers conferred under Article 315 and 320 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the Commission has the power to assign a successful candidate to any of the notified posts for which he/she is qualified and eligible, subject to fulfilling the selection criterion. Mere claim of preference for any Department / District for allotment against vacancy does not confer a right to selection for that District in particular or any District in General. 6. The appointment of selected candidates will be subject to their being found medically fit in the appropriate Medical Examination, and if he/she is of sound health, active habits free from any bodily defect or infirmity” 11. The main dispute in the present writ petition pertains to the non-awarding of the service weightage points to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he had rendered his services in the Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, as a Lab Technician, on contractual basis from July, 2015, to June, 2020, and thus, eligible for service weightage points. However, his claim has been rejected vide impugned proceedings dated 09.10.2024, stating that the petitioner rendered his services on outsourcing basis but not on contract basis; that he failed to produce the necessary documents at the relevant point of time; and that he is less meritorious in Scheduled Caste category, hence, ineligible for selection. 12. For better appreciation of the case on hand, it is apposite to refer to the petitioner’s appointment order issued by the Principal, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, vide proceedings No.MRU/Proj/ OMC/Hyd/2015/1038 dated 21.05.2015, and the relevant terms and conditions of his appointment are extracted hereunder: 1. “The Candidate is informed that his/her appointment as Lab Technician on contract basis is purely on temporary basis and is liable to the termination at any time without assigning any notice or reasons. 2. He/She will be paid consolidated payment Rs:18.360/- per month of Lab Technician per month each for a period of one year from the date of joining as per DHR/ ICMR Guidelines. 3. 2. He/She will be paid consolidated payment Rs:18.360/- per month of Lab Technician per month each for a period of one year from the date of joining as per DHR/ ICMR Guidelines. 3. During the period of His/Her service of one year he/she will be eligible for leaves strictly allows as per DHR/ ICMR guidelines subject to approval of Nodal Officer. 4. The Temporary service as Lab Technician on contract basis does not qualify him/her for any pensioner benefits.” 13. From the above, it is unequivocally clear that the petitioner’s services were utilized on a contractual basis. Hence, the contention of the respondents that the petitioner worked on outsourcing basis is wholly untenable, and thus, rejecting the claim of the petitioner on this ground cannot be countenanced. 14. Further, as regards the contention of the respondents that the petitioner rendered his services at the MDRU Lab, under a centrally- sponsored scheme by ICMR/DHRU Funds, it is pertinent to note that the petitioner was appointed on contractual basis vide proceedings dated 21.05.2015, issued by the Principal, Osmania Medical College, Hyderabad, whose jurisdiction comes within the purview of the Government of Telangana. Moreover, it is also relevant to note that as per the Notification, for claiming service weightage points, a candidate must have put in Government service, but there is no specific mention as to the State Government service or Central Government service. Therefore, the respondents ought not to have rejected the claim of the petitioner for grant of service weightage points. 15. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled for grant of service weightage points for his contractual service rendered from July, 2015 to June, 2017. Therefore, the impugned rejection order dated 09.10.2024 is wholly unsustainable and it is liable to be set aside. 16. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order vide Memo.No.467/RP-II/2017 dated 09.10.2024 issued by respondent No.3, and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for selection and appointment to the post of Lab Technician Grade-II by awarding him service weightage points as per his entitlement. Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. No costs.