SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(AP) 703

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J.
Ch Chaitanya, W/O Yemeni Swaroop Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Ap, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Law And Justice And Ors. – Respondents
W.P.No.21413, 21494 of 2025
Decided On : 18-08-2025  

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: P V Venkata Ravi Sankar and Dr. P.B Reddy
For the Respondent: GP

Engagement of Advocates as Law Officers is a professional arrangement, not subject to Writ Jurisdiction under Articles 14 and 16, affirming the Government's discretion to appoint and terminate without civil service protections.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14 and 16 - Writ petitions concerning disengagement of practicing Advocates as Law Officers - Court held that engagement is a professional arrangement and not public employment, thus not subject to Writ Jurisdiction - No violation of natural justice found as no notice was needed - Government's right to terminate without breach established - Pay in lieu of notice confirmed as legally valid. (Paras 1, 8, 11, 24, 25)

(B) Maintainability of Writ - Engagements are tenure-based and not civil posts - Principles of natural justice and equality not applicable to professional engagements. (Paras 11, 24)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners were engaged as Law Officers under government orders, subsequently disengaged without notice, leading to challenges based on statutory and constitutional grounds.

Findings of Court:
Engagements ruled as non-civil posts and support for the execution of professional discretion by the Government was provided.

Issues: 1) Whether engagement of Advocates as Law Officers constitutes public employment? 2) Is the post of a Law Officer considered civil or tenure post? 3) Legality of notice pay upon disengagement.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed the Government's discretion in appointing Law Officers, asserting that such engagements do not confer civil service rights, thus Writs against such disengagement are not maintainable.

Result: Writ petitions dismissed.

Table of Content
1. disengagement of law officers. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. grounds for challenging disengagement. (Para 8 , 9)
3. maintainability of writ petitions. (Para 10 , 11)
4. professional engagement and rights. (Para 21 , 23)
5. dismissal of writ petition. (Para 24 , 25 , 26)

ORDER :

GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J.

-

Heard Sri P.A. Seshu, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri P.V.Venkata Ravi Sankar, Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner (in W.P.No.21413 of 2025), Sri Thandava Yogesh, Ld. Counsel for the Writ Petitioner (in W.P.No.21494 of 2025), and Sri A. Srikanth Reddy, Ld. Government Pleader for Law & Legislative Affairs.

2. These two Writ Petitions involve similar facts and similar legal issues. Therefore, both the cases are heard together and are disposed of by this Common Order.

3. For the sake of convenience, this Court would rely on the facts mentioned in the Affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition in W.P.No.21413 of 2025. W.P.No.21413 of 2025:

4. The Writ Petitioner herein, who is a practicing Advocate was appointed as Assistant Government Pleader in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Vijayawada, NTR District for a period of three years vide G.O.Rt.No.116 Law (G) Department, dated 12.03.2024 (Ex.P.2). The said appointment is made subject to the conditions of service in accordance with the Instructions issued in G.O.Ms.No.187, Law (L) Department, dated 06.12.2000 (Ex.P.3). The said appointment has been made basing on the recommendation of the District Collector, NTR District (Respondent No.3) through the Letter dated 22.11.2023 to the Secretary, Law and Legislative Affairs& Justice, Department of Law, Government of Andhra Pradesh (Respondent No.2).

5. Vide impugned Proceeding bearing G.O.Rt.No.251, dated 31.07.2025 (Ex.P.1), the Writ Petitioner was disengaged from his services as Assistant Government Pleader in the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Vijayawada. A further direction was also given in the impugned Order (Ex.P.1) to the District Collector, NTR District to make interim arrangement for the vacated post by appointing a Law Officer from a nearby Court as in- charge and to further submit a panel of candidates at the earliest in accordance with the ‘Instructions’ issued by the Government in G.O.Ms. No.187 Law (L) Department, dated 06.12.2000 (Ex.P.3). The Impugned Order would also indicate that the District Collector was directed to pay one month salary in lieu of one month Notice for his disengagement in accordance with Instruction No.9 of the G.O.Ms. No.187 Law (L) Department, dated 06.12.2000 (Ex.P.3).

W.P.No.21494 of 2025:

6. The Writ Petitioner herein who is a practicing Advocate was appointed as Additional Government Pleader in the Court of Additional District Judge’s Court, Vijayawada, NTR District for a period of three years vide G.O.Rt.No.115 Law (G) Department, dated 12.03.2024 (Ex.P.2). The said appointment is made subject to the conditions of service in accordance with the Instructions issued in G.O.Ms.No.187, Law (L) Department, dated 06.12.2000 (Ex.P.3). The said appointment has been made basing on the recommendation of the District Collector, NTR District (Respondent No.2) through the Letter dated 16.11.2023 to the Secretary, Law and Legislative Affairs & Justice, Department of Law, Government of Andhra Pradesh.

-

7. Vide impugned Proceeding bearing G.O.Rt.No.250, dated 31.07.2025 (Ex.P.1), the Writ Petitioner was disengaged from his services as Additional Government Pleader in the Court of the Additional District Judge’s Court, Vijayawada, NTR District. A further direction was also given in the impugned Order (Ex.P.1) to the District Collector, NTR District to make interim arrangement for the vacated post by appointing a Law Officer from a nearby Court as in-charge and to further submit a panel of candidates at the earliest in accordance with the ‘Instructions’ issued by the Government in G.O.Ms. No.187 Law (L) Department, dated 06.12.2000 (Ex.P.3). The Impugned Order would a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top