2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 22815

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
B S BHANUMATHI
K. ANJAIAH – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
WP 20163/2025

Appointments to nominated posts of Chairpersons of Agricultural Market Committees made in violation of the rule of reservation fixed by the competent authority under existing administrative instructions are invalid and cannot be sustained.

Headnote:(A) Andhra Pradesh (50 Percent Reservations to BCs, SCs, STs and Minorities in all the Nominated Posts) Act, 2019 - Sections 3, 4 and 8 - Andhra Pradesh (50 Percent Reservations to BCs, SCs, STs and Minorities in all the Nominated Posts) Rules, 2019 - Rules 3, 5 and 8 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 15(4), 16(4) and 226 - Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 - Sections 5(1), (2), (3) and 6(1) - Reservation in nominated posts of Chairpersons of Agricultural Market Committees (AMCs) - Validity of appointments made under G.O.Rt.No.593, dated 10.07.2025; G.O.Rt.No.855, dated 29.09.2025; and the second proceeding in Rc.No.168/SMA/2024, dated 14.08.2025 - The State enacted the Act, 2019 mandating 50% reservation to BCs, SCs, STs and Minorities in all nominated posts. The Government issued a Memo, dated 06.12.2024, treating the 'district' as a unit for R.O.R. for Chairpersons of AMCs. Subsequently, a Memo, dated 10.10.2025, modified the earlier memo to treat the 'State' as a unit. The court held that appointments made in violation of the R.O.R. fixed by the District Collectors under the then-existing memo cannot sustain legality, even if already made, and cannot be adjusted against the R.O.R. to be followed after accepting the proposal as required under the Government Memos. (Paras 2-4, 12-14, 30-34)

(B) Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 - Locus standi to challenge appointments made in violation of reservation policy - The court held that petitioners belonging to the category in respect of which the corresponding AMCs were shown to be reserved as per the proceedings of the District Collectors have interest in the subject matter and are likely to be affected by losing an opportunity to be appointed. Therefore, the objection on the ground of lack of locus standi is unsustainable. (Paras 16-17)

(C) Policy Decision - Doctrine of Functus Officio - The court held that implementation of R.O.R. is a matter of policy and the government is not rendered functus officio after issuing administrative instructions; such instructions are amenable to modification to effectively enforce the policy. However, since the challenge in these writ petitions is based on the statutory obligation under the Act, 2019 and the Rules made thereunder, the court can entertain the petitions. (Paras 18-20, 22)

(D) Doctrine of Pleasure - The court held that while appointments by nomination are governed by the doctrine of pleasure, the nominated posts in the present cases are governed by the R.O.R. The challenge is that the R.O.R. has not been followed as per statutory requirement. Therefore, the respondents cannot take shelter of the doctrine of pleasure to resist these writ petitions. (Para 23) (E) Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation - The court held that the writ petitions are not based solely on the doctrine of legitimate expectation but on the proper implementation of the R.O.R., which is a statutory mandate. Therefore, the petitions cannot be countered by arguments on legitimate expectation. (Paras 24-24) (F) Government Memos - Administrative Instructions - The court held that the Government Memo, dated 10.10.2025, is only an amendment to the previous Memo, dated 06.12.2024, and not a supersession. The Director of Agricultural Marketing is required to furnish a fresh list of allocation of posts of Chairman of AMCs to the Government for further action. (Paras 28-30, 32)

Facts of the case:
The writ petitions challenged various appointments and proceedings concerning the Chairpersons of Agricultural Market Committees (AMCs) in the State. The petitioners alleged that the appointments were made violating the rule of reservation (R.O.R.) fixed by the District Collectors pursuant to the Andhra Pradesh (50 Percent Reservations to BCs, SCs, STs and Minorities in all the Nominated Posts) Act, 2019. The State had issued G.O.Rt.No.593, dated 10.07.2025, appointing a candidate from the O.C. category as Chairman of the AMC, Yerragondapalem, by relaxing norms for one year. In another instance, G.O.Rt.No.855, dated 29.09.2025, appointed an O.C. candidate as Chairman of the AMC, B.N. Kandriga. Further, the District Collector of S.P.S.R. Nellore issued two conflicting proceedings on 14.08.2025, changing the R.O.R. for the posts of Chairman of AMCs, Udayagiri and Kovur. The respondents contended that the earlier Memo, dated 06.12.2024, was modified by a subsequent Memo, dated 10.10.2025, treating the 'State' as a unit, and the appointments were made in consonance with the same.

Findings of Court:
All the impugned proceedings and appointments were set aside, being contrary to the R.O.R. fixed by the District Collectors under the then-existing Memo and violative of the R.O.R. The court directed that any appointment already made in violation of law cannot sustain legality and cannot be adjusted against the R.O.R. to be followed after accepting the proposal as required under the Government Memos.

Issues: The main issues were the validity of appointments made to the posts of Chairman of AMCs in violation of the rule of reservation fixed by the District Collectors; the locus standi of the petitioners to challenge such appointments; and the effect of the subsequent Government Memo, dated 10.10.2025, on the validity of appointments made earlier.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that appointments made in violation of the R.O.R. fixed by the competent authority under the existing administrative instructions cannot sustain legality, even if already made, and cannot be adjusted against the R.O.R. to be followed after the modification of the instructions. The impugned proceedings and G.Os. are invalid and set aside. Result : Writ petitions allowed. The G.O.Rt.No.593, dated 10.07.2025; G.O.Rt.No.855, dated 29.09.2025; and the second proceeding in Rc.No.168/SMA/2024, dated 14.08.2025 were set aside. No order as to costs.

COMMON ORDER

(i) W.P.No.20163 of 2025 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the G.O.Rt.No.593, dated 10.07.2025, issued by the 1^st respondent, appointing the 7^th respondent, Chekuri Subba Rao, who belongs to the O.C. category, as Chairman of the Agricultural Market Committee, (for short, ‘A.M.C.’), Yerragondapalem, Prakasam District, by relaxing the norms prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.77, dated 27.09.2019, for a period of one (1) year, as illegal and consequently set aside G.O.Rt.No.593, dated 10.07.2025, to the extent of appointment of the 7^th respondent and further direct the respondents to forthwith implement the rule of reservation (in short, ‘R.O.R) finalized by the 4^th respondent vide proceedings in Rc.No.68/B/2024, dated 08.07.2025, and appoint a suitable candidate belonging to the scheduled tribe category.

(ii) W.P.No.19305 of 2025 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the same relief as in W.P.No.20163 of 2025, with the only difference that the 5^th respondent herein is the 7^th respondent in W.P.No.20163 of 2025.

(iii) W.P.No.23109 of 2025 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the proceeding of the 3^rd respondent in Rc.No.168/SMA/2024, dated 14.08.2025, changing the R.O.R. for the post of Chairman, A.M.C., Udayagiri from B.C. (General) to O.C. (Woman), as illegal and further declare that the post of Chairman, A.M.C., Udayagiri, be reserved for B.C. (General).

(iv) W.P.No.25405 of 2025 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the proceeding of the 3^rd respondent in Rc.No.168/SMA/2024, dated 14.08.2025, changing the R.O.R. for the post of Chairman, A.M.C., Kovur, from S.T. (General) to O.C. (General), as illegal and further direct that the post of Chairman, A.M.C., Kovur be reserved for S.T. (General).

(v) W.P.No.26669 of 2025 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the action of the respondents in finalizing the list of candidates for constitution of the A.M.C., B.N.Kandriga, without following the R.O.R. notified by order in AGCO5-AMC/23/2024- JMA, dt.Nil-01-2025 as illegal and consequently set aside the selection of Smt. M.Jyothi Sudhakar Naidu (female-O.C.) / 5^th respondent as Chairman, A.M.C., B.N.Kandriga.

(vi) W.P.No.31490 of 2025 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare the G.O.Rt.No.855, Agriculture and Cooperation (MKTG-II) Department, dt.29-09-2025, passed by the 1^st respondent appointing the 7^th respondent / Smt. M. Jyoti Sudhakar Naidu, as Chairman, A.M.C., B.N. Kandriga, Tirupathi District, without following the R.O.R. notified by order in AGCO5-AMC/23/2024-JMA, dt.Nil-01-2025 as illegal and consequently set aside the G.O.Rt.No.855, dt.29-09-2025.

2. The State of Andhra Pradesh enacted the Andhra Pradesh (50 Percent Reservations to BCs, SCs, STs and Minorities in all the Nominated Posts) Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act, 2019’). The State of A.P made the ‘Andhra Pradesh (50 Percent Reservations to BCs, SCs, STs and Minorities in all the Nominated Posts) Rules, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules, 2019’) vide G.O.Ms.No.77, dated 27.09.2019, mandating 50% reservation to B.Cs., S.Cs., S.Ts. and minorities in all nominated posts, including in A.M.Cs. in the State of A.P.

3. The Government of A.P., Agriculture & Cooperation (Marketing-I) Department, issued a Memo No.AGC051-MKTG/283/2024-Mktg.I, dated 06.12.2024, treating the ‘district’ as a unit for implementation of R.O.R. for the posts of Chairman of A.M.Cs. as per the Rules, 2019. The government of A.P., Agriculture & Cooperation (Marketing-I) Department, issued the Urgent Memo No.AGC01-MKTG/117-2025- Mktg.1, dt.18.09.2025, requesting the Director of Agricultural Marketing to furnish proposals for the constitution of certain A.M.Cs. to the Government for taking further action in the matter. Basing on the memo, the Director of Agricultural Marketing issued the Memo No.AGC05- 11/106/2024, dated

Click Here to Read the rest of this document