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

2026 Supreme(AP) 193

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
LISA GILL, NINALA JAYASURYA, JJ.
Jakkam Srinivasulu, S/o. Late raju – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Principal Secretary, Department Of Forest – Respondent
Writ Appeal No. 1359 of 2025
Decided On : 13-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Peeta Raman, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. G. Raju, learned Government Pleader For Services I

Promotion eligibility can be contested amid pending proceedings, but immediate actions should not disrupt existing review processes.

Headnote:(A) Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 - Rule 5 - Promotion - The appellant sought promotion to the post of Forest Section Officer, claiming eligibility despite pending criminal and disciplinary proceedings. The learned Single Bench reserved a post for the appellant during the writ petition proceedings. The appellant contended that an immediate direction for promotion should have been issued. (Paras 4, 6)

Facts of the case:
The appellant challenged the learned Single Bench's order which reserved a post for him pending the writ petition on promotion eligibility, arguing for a direct promotion instead of ad-hoc arrangements while the petition is considered.

Findings of Court:
The court did not find grounds to interfere with the learned Single Bench's interim order and noted that the issues raised were already being examined in the pending writ petition.

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to immediate promotion despite pending criminal and disciplinary proceedings, and if the learned Single Bench's order was appropriate.

Ratio Decidendi: The court maintained that it was not appropriate to adjudicate the promotion issue at this stage and emphasized the learned Single Bench's authority to consider all relevant arguments in its proceedings. The order directed for ad-hoc arrangements only, maintaining the status quo while the case progresses.

Result: Writ appeal dismissed with no order as to costs.

Judgment:

Lisa Gill, J.

Prayer in this appeal is for setting aside Interlocutory order dated 18.09.2025 passed by learned Single Bench in W.P.No.24637 of 2025.

2. Aforesaid writ petition has been filed for declaring action of 3rd respondent in not considering petitioner’s (present appellant) candidature for promotion to the post of Forest Section Officer despite the said petitioner being fully eligible for the said promotion. It is also prayed that 3rd respondent be directed to take affirmative steps to consider petitioner’s candidature for promotion as sought.

3. Learned Single Bench on considering the matter, observed that detailed hearing is required and posted the matter to 16.10.2025. In the meanwhile, respondent authorities were directed to keep one post in the cadre of Forest Section Officer reserved for the petitioner, pending disposal of the writ petition. Respondents were entitled to make ad-hoc arrangements to meet the exigencies of service in the said post subject to outcome of the said writ petition. Aggrieved therefrom, present writ appeal has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that a direction should have been given by the learned Single Bench for promoting the appellant/petitioner as per his seniority without reference to the fact that criminal trial is pending besides pendency of disciplinary proceedings as appellant is seeking promotion to a non-selection post. Direction should thus have been issued, at the very outset itself, in view of Rule 5 of A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996.

5. Learned counsel for respondent has opposed this appeal while submitted that such a direction would amount to allowing the writ petition by way of an interim order. Dismissal of appeal is sought.

6. Having heard learned counsel for parties, we do not find any ground to cause interference at this stage in this writ appeal, challenging interlocutory order, dated 18.09.2025. One post of Forest Section Officer has already been directed to be kept reserved pending disposal of writ petition with liberty to respondents to make only ad-hoc arrangements and that too subject to decision of the writ petition. Learned counsel for appellant is unable to deny that all the pleas and arguments as are being raised in this appeal in fact form the subject matter of the writ petition in question and are well within the realm of consideration by learned Single Bench. In our considered opinion it is not appropriate to delve upon and adjudicate upon the said issues at this stage in present proceedings. Learned counsel for appellant is unable to point out any illegality, infirmity or irregularity which calls for interference in this writ appeal.

7. It is brought to our notice that subsequently, Writ Petition Nos.19007, 21110 & 22997 of 2024 were listed, along with the present writ appeal.

8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances above, this writ appeal is dismissed. W.P.No.24637 of 2025 as well as the aforesaid writ petitions tagged along-with be placed before the learned Single Bench, as per roster, for decision on merits.

There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed accordingly.

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