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) 7476

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HARINATH.N
R.Ramanjaneyulu – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector cum Chairman – Respondent
WP 3409/2013



APHC010622212013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3457]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NOs: 3387, 3390, 3393 and 3409/2013 WRIT PETITION NO: 3387/2013 Between:

1. Y .KAMESWARA RAO, S/O. LATE Y.KRISHNAIAH,, OCC:

UNEMPLOYEE, R/O. SANGAIAH PET, NANDIKOTKUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM CHAIRMAN, SELECTION COMMITTEE, REH OF DISPLACED PERSONS KURNOOL DISTRICT.

2. T HE CHIEF ENGINEER SRI SAILAM PROJECT, NSRS PROJECT, VI FLOOR, GAGAN VIHAR, M.J.ROAD, HYDERABAD.

3. T HE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, DAM MAINTENANCE CIRCLE, NSRS PROJECT, SRI SAILAM DAM, SUNNIPENTA POST, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

4. T HE GOVERNMENT OF A P, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, I & CAD (PROJECT WING) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, HYDERABAD.

...RESPONDENT(S):

1. Y VENUGOPAL REDDY

1. GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA DEV WRIT PETITION NO: 3390/2013 Between:

1. B .SIVASANKAR, S/O. B.P. RAMULU, AGE 33 YEARS, OCC:

UNEMPLOYEE, RIO. H.NO.1-43, TARIGOPULA VILLAGE, JUPADU BUNGLOW MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM CHAIRMAN, SELECTION COMMITTEE, REH OF DISPLACED PERSONS KURNOOL DISTRICT.

2. T HE CHIEF ENGINEER SRI SAILAM PROJECT, NSRS PROJECT, VI FLOOR, GAGAN VIHAR, M.J.ROAD, HYDERABAD.

3. T HE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER, DAM MAINTENANCE CIRCLE, NSRS PROJECT, SRI SAILAM DARN, SUNNIPENTA POST, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

4. T HE GOVERNMENT OF A P, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, I & CAD (PROJECT WING) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, HYDERABAD.

...RESPONDENT(S):

1. Y VENUGOPAL REDDY

1. GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA DEV WRIT PETITION NO: 3393/2013 Between:

1. K . JAGADEESWARA REDDY, S/O. K. SAMBASIVA REDDY, AGE 45 YRS, OCC: UNEMPLOYEE, R/O. KURUKUNDA POST, ATMAKUR MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM CHAIRMAN SELECTION COMMITTEE, REH OF DISPLACED PERSONS, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

2. T HE CHIEF ENINGEER SRI SAILAM PROJECT, NSRS PROJECT, VI FLOOR, GAGAN VIHAR, M.J. ROAD, HYDERABAD.

3. T HE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER DAM MAINTENANCE CIRCLE, NSRS PROJECT, SRI SAILAM DAM, SUNNIPENTA POST, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

4. T HE GOVERNENT OF A P REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, I &

CAD (PROJECT WING) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, HYDERABAD.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. Y VENUGOPAL REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA DEV WRIT PETITION NO: 3409/2013 Between:

1. R .RAMANJANEYULU, S/O.LATE R.SUBBAIAH, OCC: UNEMPLOYEE, R/O.H.NO.16-38, K-92, COLLEGE ROAD,NANDIKOTKUR, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CUM CHAIRMAN, SELECTION COMMITTEE, REH OF DISPLACED PERSONS,KURNOOL DISTRICT

2. T HE CHIEF ENGINEER, SRI SAILAM PROJECT,NSRS PROJECT,VI FLOOR,GAGAN VIHAR,M.J.ROAD,HYDERABAD

3. T HE SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER DAMMAINTENANCE, CIRCLE, NSRS PROJECT, SRI SAILAM DAM, SUNNIPENTA POST, KURNOOL DISTRICT

4. T HE GOVERNMENT OF AP, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY , I&CAD (PROJECT WING) DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS,HYDERABAD ...RESPONDENT(S):

1. Y VENUGOPAL REDDY

1. GP FOR IRRIGATION & COMM AREA DEV The Court made the following:

COMMON ORDER:-

The petitioner in W.P.No.3387 of 2013, the petitioner in W.P.No.3390 of

2013, the petitioner in W.P.No.3393 of 2013 and the petitioner in W.P.No.3409 of 2013 have filed the writ petitions seeking to declare the action of the 1st respondent in not including the petitioner’s name in the eligible list for providing employment to displaced families under the NSRS Project, Srisailam.

2. It is submitted that the respondents initially included the petitioner’s name in the seniority list prepared for considering providing employment. It is further submitted that subsequently, the 1st respondent rejected the case of the petitioner on the premise that the petitioner is not entitled to claim the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.98. The petitioner is the grandchild of the originally displaced family and, as such, the petitioner’s case was no

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