The Andhra Pradesh High Court considered a batch of petitions filed by candidates who had applied for Assistant Professor positions at Sri Venkateswara University. The petitioners contended that the Government Order issued by the State, which reduced the number of sanctioned teaching posts in various departments, violated their legitimate expectation to be considered for appointment. They argued that the reduction of posts thwarted the recruitment process and therefore infringed upon their right to equal treatment in public employment.
The Court, comprising Chief Justice Lisa Gill and Justice R. Raghunandan Rao, examined the scope of the State’s authority to create, abolish or rationalise posts in government educational institutions. It observed that the power to determine the cadre strength of teaching staff resides with the executive and is subject only to the constraints of statutory provisions, financial availability and administrative efficiency. The Court emphasized that this power is not fettered by the expectations of individuals who seek employment.
On the question of legitimate expectation, the Court held that a mere hope or desire to be considered for a vacancy does not give rise to a legally enforceable right to compel the State to retain or create a post. It clarified that legitimate expectation can arise only when there is a clear promise or an established practice that has been consistently followed, and even then it is subject to overriding public interest. In the present case, no such promise or practice was shown to exist.
The Court further noted that the rationalisation exercise was undertaken after a detailed review of the university’s financial position, student‑teacher ratios and workload norms. The Government Order was based on objective criteria aimed at ensuring optimal utilization of resources. The Court found no indication of mala fide intent, arbitrariness or discrimination in the impugned order. Consequently, the rationalisation survived judicial scrutiny.