Back
APHC010280602022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3332]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT:THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION TRANSFERED FROM APAT NO: 347/2022 Along with WRIT PETITION TRANSFERED FROM APAT NO: 357/2022 W.P.(AT) No.347 of 2022 Between:
1. CH.SRINIVASA REDDY,, S/O PEDAMALLA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC, WORK INSPECTOR, 0/0 P.R.SUB DIVISION, GUNTUR ,R/O GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. K.RAMESH,, S/O VENKAIAH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC, WORK INSPECTOR, 0/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, GUNTUR,R/O GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
3. E.DASARADHARAMAIAH,, S/O VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC, WORK INSPECTOR, 0/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, GUNTUR, R/O GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
4. K.SAMBASIVA RAO,, S/O. VENKATARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC, WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, TENALI,R/O TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
5. SK.ABDUL NAYEEM,, S/O RAHMAN, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS OCC, WORK INSPECTOR, 0/O P.R. SUB DIVISION. TENALI,R/O TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
6. Y.SRIDHAR RAO,, S/O RANGA RAO, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS OCC, WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, VEMURU, R/O VEMURU, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
7. D.CHANDRASEKHAR REDDY,, S/O VENKAT REDDY, AGED ABOUT
48 YEARS, OCC, WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, TENALI,R/O TENALI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
8. G.VASUDEVA RAO,, S/O NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS OCC, WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.P.I.U.SUB DIVISION, REPALLE, RIO REPALLE, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
9. K.NAGALINGESWARA RAO,, S/O SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT
48 YEARS, OCC, WORK INSPEETOR,O/O P.R. SUB DIVISION, REPALLE,R/O REPALLE, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE ENGINERINCHIEF, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, STATE OF AP, VASUDA COMPLEX, GOLLAPUDI ROAD, VIJAYAWADA KRISHNA DISTRICT.
3. THE STATE OF A P, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT 15 FLOOR, 2ND BLOCK, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE OFFICE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
pleased to declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the applicants from the date of completion of 10 years services in the existing vacancies as held by the Honble High Court in WP No 24377/2007 as confirmed in the WA No 782/2010 and rejecting the same by the 4th respondent in Proc.No.A3/WP(AT)-347/2022 dated 20.08.2025, as illegal void and contrary to the articles 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and set aside the 4th respondent in Proc.No.A3/WP(AT)-347/2022 dated
20.08.2025, with a further direction the respondents to regularize the services of the applicants in the existing vacancies from the date of completion of 10 years of service in terms of Judgment in WP No 27217/2017 as confirmed in WA No 782/2010 and WP No 17217/2017 dt19.09.2017 and pass Main Prayer amended/substituted as per Court Order dated 10.12.2025 vide IA No.1 of 2025 in WP (A.T.) No.347 of 2022.
IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to allow the Applicants to file Single Original Application in the interest of Justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased the main prayer in W.P.(AT) 347/2022,be amended FROM: pleased to declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the applicants from the date of completion of 10 years services in the existing vacancies as held by the Honble High Court in WP No 24377/2007 as confirmed in the WA No 782/2010 as illegal void and contrary to the articles 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and further direct the respondents to regularize the services of the applicants in the existing vacancies from the date of completion of 10 years of service in terms of Judgment in WP No 27217/2017 as confirmed in WA No 782/2010 and WP No 17217/2017 dtl9. 09 .2017 and pass such other order or orders. TO: pleased to declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the applicants from the date of completion of 10 years services in the existing vacancies as held by the Honble High Court in WP No 24377/2007 as confirmed in the WA No 782/2010 and rejecting the same by the 4“’ respondent in Proc.No.A3/WP(AT)-347/2022 dated: 20.08.2025, as illegal void and contrary to the articles 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and set aside the the 4^'' respondent Proc.No.A3/WP(AT)-347/2022 dated:in IK 20.08.2025, with a further direction the respondents to regularize the services of the applicants in the existing vacancies from the date of completion of 10 years of service in terms of Judgment in WP No 27217/2017 as confirmed in WA No 782/2010 and WP No 17217/2017 dtl9. 09 .2017 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to grant leave to the respondent to file Counter Affidavit and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. T V V KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES IV
2. GP FOR SERVICES I W.P(AT) No.357 of 2022 Between:
1. K.VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O VENKATARAO, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, KOVVURU,R/O KOVVURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
2. N.RAVI VARMA,, S/O SURYANARAYANA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R. SUB DIVISION, PALAKOL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, R/O PALAKOL, PALAKOL MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DIST.
3. BH.V.SURYANARAYANA RAJU,, S/O SATYANARAYANA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS , OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, PALAKOL, R/O PALAKOL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
4. B.CHANTI,, S/O DHARMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS OCC.
WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, BHIMADOLU , R/O BHIMADOLU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
5. D.V.SATYANARAYANA RAJU,, S/O KRISHNAM RAJU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, BHIMADOLU, R/O BHIMADOLU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
6. B.SURAYA RAO,, S/O MUSALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC.
WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, BHIMADOLU,R/O BHIMADOLU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
7. CH.SIVA PRASADA RAJU,, S/O RAMAKRISHNA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, TANUKU,R/O TANUKU , WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
8. P. SATYANANDA VARMA,, S/O SEETHARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT
50 YEARS,OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R. SUB DIVISION, TANUKU,R/O TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
9. P.VENKATESWARA RAO,, S/O NARASIMHARAO, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR ,O/O P.R. SUB DIVISION, TANUKU, R/O TANUKU,WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
10. N.V.V.S.S.PRASAD,, S/O SESHAGIRI RAO, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, KOVVUR,R/O KOVVUR, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
11. N.S.V.CHAKRAPANI,, S/O SUDHARSHAN RAO, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, BHIMADOLU,R/O BHIMADOLU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
12. M.L.N.S.RAMA RAJU,, S/O VENKATAPATHI RAJU AGED ABOUT
51 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION,KOYYALAGUDEM, RIO KOYYALAGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
13. I.NARAYANA MURTHY,, S/O APPA RAO, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, P.R. SUB-DIVISION, O/O AKIVEEDU, R/O AKIVEEDU,WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
14. N.HANUMANTHA RAO,, S/O SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, UNDRAJAVARAM, R/O UNDRAJAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
15. V.LAKSHMANA RAO,, S/O VENKATESWARARAO, AGED ABOUT
49 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR ,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, AKIVEEDU, R/O AKIVEEDU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
16. B.DEVARAJU,, S/O RAMULU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS OCC.
WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.P.I.U, BHIMADOLU,R/O BHIMADOLU WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
17. R.SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O NARASIMHAM, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, KOVVURU,R/O KOVVURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
18. K.DHANUNJAYA RAO,, S/O SADASHIVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, CHINTALAPUDI, R/O CHINTALAPUDI, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
19. M.MURALIMOHAN,, S/O RAMAMOHANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, TADEPALLIGUDETN,R/O TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
20. D.N.SATYANARAYANA,, S/O RADHAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, PENUMANTRA,R/O PENUMANTRA, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
21. P.V.BALANANDA RAO,, S/O NARASINGA RAO, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, KOYYALAGUDEM,R/O KOYYALAGUDEM , WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
22. A.SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION,UNDRAJAVARAM, R/O UNDRAJAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
23. A.RADHA KRISHNA,, S/O RAMA RAO, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, UNDRAJAVARAM,R/O UNDRAJAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
24. N.V.S.NAGESWARA RAO,, S/O PERAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, TADEPALLIGUDEM, RIO TADEPALLIGUDEM,WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
25. I.V.K.VISWANADHA RAJU,, S/O NARASIMHA RAJU AGED ABOUT
54 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION KOYYALAGUDEM,R/O KOYYALAGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
26. U.VENKATESWARA RAO,, S/O PADMANABHAM, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, TADEPALLIGUDEM,R/O TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
27. R.SRINIVASA RAJU,, S/O SHIVARAMA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR,O/O P.R.SUB DIG ISION, PALAKOL, W/O PALAKOL,WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
28. A.UMAMAHESWARA RAO,, S/O BHIMA RAJU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O P.R.SUB DIVISION, NARASAPURAM, RIO NARASAPURAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
29. R.SATYANARAYANA RAJU,, S/O PALLAM RAJU,AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC. WORK INSPECTOR, O/O DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, P.R.DIVISION, TANUKU,R/O TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE ENGINERINCHIEF, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, STATE OF AP, VASUDA COMPLEX, GOLLAPUDI ROAD, VIJAYAWADA KRISHNA DISTRICT.
3. THE STATE OF A P, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT FLOOR, 2ND BLOCK, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ CIRCLE OFFICE, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
pleased to declare the action of the respondents in not regularizing the services of the applicants from the date of completion of 10 years services in the existing vacancies as held by the Hon'ble High Court in WP.No.24377/2007 as confirmed in the WA.No.782/2010 as illegal, void and contrary to the articles 14 and 21 of the constitution of india and further direct the respondents to regularize the services of the applicants in the existing vacancies from the date of completion of 10 years of service in terms of Judgment in WP.No.27217/2017 as confirmed in WA.No.782/2010 and WP.No. 27217/2017, dt. 19.9.2017 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to allow the Applicants to file Single Original Application in the interest of Justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to grant leave to the Respondent to file counter affidavit and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. T V V KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES IV The Court made the following:
RESERVED ON 29-12-2025 PRONOUNCED ON 27-02-2026 UPLOADED ON 02.03.2026
COMMON ORDER:
The grievance of the petitioners in these writ petitioins is that their service was not regularized from the date of completion of 10 years of service in the existing vacancies as held by this Court in W.P.No.24377 of 2007 as confirmed in W.A.No.782 of 2010.
2. The contents of the writ petitions, in brief, are that the petitioners were initially appointed as N.M.R.Technical Work Inspectors during the year 1989 onwards and working as such and thereafter vide G.O.Rt.No.474, PR & RD Department, dated 25.02.2009 and G.O.Rt.No. 700, PR & RD Department, dated 08.04.2009, the Government granted minimum time scale of pay and Dearness Allowance attached to the post of Technical Work Inspectors to the petitioners. That the petitioners are fully eligible and qualified to hold the post of Technical Work Inspectors and hence they are eligible for regularization of services. That vide G.O.Rt.No.474, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development (ESTT.II-A) Department, dated 25.02.2009, the Government allowed the remuneration at the minimum time scale of pay of Work Inspectors in Revision of Pay Scales, 2005 and subsequently the petitioners were allowed to draw the time scale pending regularization vide proceedings of the Commissioner. That though the petitioners were getting all the benefits on par with the regular employees, but their services are not regularized in spite of the pronouncements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi; State of Karnataka and another vs. M.L.Kesari and others and of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Kodali Raju and others vs. APSRTC, which was confirmed by the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No.782 of 20210, which was further confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in S.L.P.
It is the further case of the petitioners that though there are so many vacancies and all the petitioners are working in the existing vacancies and they are eligible, the vacancies were kept unfilled. Hence the writ petition with a prayer to direct the respondent authorities to regularize the services of the petitioners from the date of completion of 10 years against the existing vacancies in terms of the observations made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision in State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi.
3. The respondent no.4-Superintending Engineer, Panchayat Raj Circle, filed counter affidavit, denying the material averments of the petition inter alia contending that the benefits that are eligible to the petitioners were already extended and as the petitioners have not completed minimum service of five (05) years as on 25.11.1993, they are not entitled for the benefits of G.O.Ms.No.212, Finance & Planning (FW.PC.III) Department, dated 22.04.1994. It is further stated in the counter that the petitioners are not being parties to the writ petition vide W.P.No.27217 of 2017, are not entitled to get the benefits extended to the petitioners therein. Accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition.
4. Heard Sri K.R.Srinivas , learned Senior counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Government Pleader for Services-IV.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners, while reiterating the contents of the writ affidavit would contend that the petitioners, who were appointed as Non-Muster-Roll (N.M.R.) Technical Work Inspectors, are entitled to get regularization of their services immediately upon completion of 10 years of temporary service as per the pronouncement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka and another vs. M.L.Kesari and others, 2009(8) SCC 431, and as per the decisions of High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Kodali Raju and others vs. APSRTC, 2011(1)ALD 234 and U.V.S.R.Prasad and others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and another, 2018(2) ald 282(db), however, despite of availability of existing vacancies the service of the petitioners was not regularized. Accordingly, prayed to allow the writ petition.
6. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Services-IV while reiterating the contents of the counter affidavit w
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
