APHC010385672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3565]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA WRIT APPEAL NO: 921/2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 20.09.2024 in WP No. 19305 of 2006 Between:

1. T HE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD NOW FUNCTIONING AT GARUDADRI KK TOWERS LAKSHMINARASIMHA COLONY MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...APPELLANT AND

1. S RI V A S NAIDU, S/O LATE PARANDAMAIAH A.M.A.L. COLLEGE, ANAKAPALLE POST, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.

2. A M A L COLLEGE, ANAKAPALLE POST, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 531001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CORRESPONDENT, RESPONDENT NO.2 WAS IMPLEADED AS PER C.O.DT.02.02.2026 VIDE I.A.NO.01 OF 2026 IN W.A.NO.921 OF 2025.

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 to condone the delay of 284 days in filing the writ appeal against the orders dated 13-09-2024 in WP No. 19305 of 2006 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 to SUSPEND the operation of the order dated 20.09.2024 in W.P.No.19305 of

2006 IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 permit the appellants/petitioners to impaled proposed respondent A.M.A.L. College, Anakapalle as respondent No.2 in Writ Appeal No. 921 of 2025 and to pass Counsel for the Appellant:

1. GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. K SARVA BHOUMA RAO

2. CHILAMKURTHI SATYA DEV NAIDU The Court made the following Judgment: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Subhendu Samanta The instant Writ Appeal is preferred against the order dated 13.09.2024 passed in W.P.No.19305 of 2006. I.A.No.1 of 2025 is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 284 days in filing this writ appeal.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. It appears from the accompanying affidavit filed by the appellant in I.A.No.1 of 2025 that the reason for delay was demonstrated in paragraph 4 of the said affidavit, which read as follows:

“4. It is respectfully submitted that the order in W.P.No.19305 of 2006 was passed on 13.09.2024 and the same was received by the Department on 13.11.2024. After receipt of the order, the Government Pleader for Higher Education has been sought opinion on the orders dated: 13.09.2024. In reply, vide letter dated: 09.04.2025 rendered his opinion to file Writ Appeal against the orders of the Learned Single Judge dated: 13.09.2024 in W.P.No.19305 of 2006. Further summer vacation commenced from 10.05.2025 to 15.06.2025. Hence the delay occurred. However, the same could not be filed for want of delay petition. Accordingly delay petition is prepared and submitted to the Hon’ble Court. Hence, delay of 284 days had occurred in filing the appeal. I submit that the delay that has occurred in filing the above appeal is only due to administrative reasons and not intentional or willful.”

4. It is surprising to note that though the order under challenge was passed on 13.09.2024 in the presence of learned Government Pleader for Higher Education, the appellant has stated in the application that the department has received the order on 13.11.2024.

5. Due to bureaucratic lethargy, i.e., moving file to one department to another for getting instructions and opinion for filing the appeal, 284 days have already been elapsed.

6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shivamma (Dead) by LRs vs. Karnataka Housing Board and Others, 2025 LawSuit (SC) 1254 has specifically deprecated the practice of different Government