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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 1282

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
D RAMESH, J
BYNI KAMALAKARA, THANAKANTI BHASKAR REDDY, VUDUGUNDIA RAJASEKHAR, BODREDDY MADHUKAR REDDY, AVULA JAYAPRAKASH, VIJAYA BHASKAR REDDY R, SIBBALA MOHAN RAJA, GITHANNAGARI DIVAKAR REDDY, MAMDAM SIVA KUMAR, V ULLI BHASKAR, S . GOPAL, G . KIRAN, A AVULA ANIL KUMAR, T . DAMODHAR, G . GANGADRI, V ADDIPALLI MALLIKARJUNA, B ANDAMEEDA CHANDRASEKHAR, M ASUPALLI KRISHNAMURTHY, B ATHULA CHANDRASEKHAR, K ALLURI MUNIRAJA, P . JANARDHANA REDDY, M ANDAPATI CHENDRAIAH, M . RAJASEKHAR, N . BHASKAR, B OLLINENI VENKATRAMANA, G AJJALA DORASWAMY, N . SIVAPRASAD REDDY, M ADDE ESWAR REDDY, S URENDRA R, M . SRINIVASULU REDDY, D . REDDAPPA, S . GUNASEKHAR RAO, K . VIJAY KUMAR, N AGIREDDY VENKATASESHAREDDY, K . BHASKAR BABU, K ASALA HEMACHANDRA, M ALLALA SURESH, M ADDALA REDDISWAR, T . SUBRAMANYAM, G UNJI PRABHAKAR, S . D , S . ASHOK KUMAR, D A H VII ATAPADO, B ER SOHDOWN – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: PEETA RAMAN
For the Respondents: VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL, V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL), GP FOR SERVICES I, B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA, K.KRISHNABUSHAN CHOWDARY SC For APGENCO

Table of Content
1. writ seeking conversion challenges administration's position. (Para 1 , 4)
2. court emphasizes lack of direct employment relationship. (Para 2 , 8 , 11)
3. legal principles governing regularization as analyzed by court. (Para 3 , 6 , 10)
4. controversy over employee status influencing legal recourse. (Para 5 , 9)
5. court's final decision is dismissing the petitions. (Para 13 , 15)

COMMON ORDER:

W.P.No.4351 of 2026:

The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

“….to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in amending the APSEB /i) APSPDCL Service Regulations to convert and upgrade the services of Energy Assistants Junior Linemen Grade-ll (JLM Gr-ll), being unofficial respondents 35 to 39 and other similarly situated persons, working under the Village Ward Secretariat System under the jurisdiction of the 3rd respondent, as Junior Linemen (JLMs) of the 18th respondent APSPDCL, thereby causing the petitioners to be thrown out of employment without absorbing or regularising their services, and also denying the minimum time scale as laid down in State of Punjab vs. Ja

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top