2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 11871
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
D RAMESH
G KIRAN KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF AP – Respondent
WP 31946/2023
APHC010620552023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3208]
AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 31946/2023 Between:
1. G KIRAN KUMAR, S/O. PENCHALA NARSAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, GUNDAVOLU VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
2. DASARI PENCHALASWAMY,, S/O.PENCHALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, GUNDAVOLU VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
3. P.PAVANKUMAR,, S/O.BALA CHENNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, GUNDAVOLU VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SYSK NELLORE DISTRICT.
4. P.KESAVA,, S/O. BALA CHENNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, GUNDAVOLU VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
5. G.ARJUN RAO,, S/O. NARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, GUNDAVOLU VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
6. M.CHAITANYA KUMAR,, M/O. MANJULA, AGED ABOUT
33 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, PENUBARTHI VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
7. S.PRAVENKUMAR,, S/O.PENCHALAIAH, AGED ABOUT
39 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, PENUBARTHI VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
8. V.VIJAYAMMA,, D/O. VENKATARAYULU, AGED ABOUT
28 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, RAMKUR VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
9. S.VENKATESWARLU,, S/O. SREENIVASULU, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, PENUBARTHI VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
10. S .NIRANJAN,, S/O. PENCHALA SUBBAIAH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, PENUBARTHI VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
11. G .RAMAKRISHNNAIAH, , S/O. ESWARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, KUMMARAGUNTA VILLAGE, RAPUR MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
12. B .PARVATHI,, D/O. ESWARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, UNEMPLOYEE, KOLLAPANAIDUPALLI VILLAGE, CHEJARLA MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. T HE STATE OF AP, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. T HE STATE OF ANDHARA PRADESH, IRRIGATION AND CAD (RR) DEPARTMENT, REP. BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
3. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NELLORE SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT
4. T HE CHIEF ENGINEER, TELUGU GANGA OFFICE, ALIPIRI BYPASS ROAD, SRINIVASA NAGAR, TIRUPATHI-517507.
5. T HE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, AND S.B. CIRCLE, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. S V MUNI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES III The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH WRIT PETITION No.31946 of 2023
ORDER:
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
“….to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 5, in not including the names of the petitioners in the Seniority list of 106 candidates, who seek employment under the displaced persons quota of Kandaleru Reservoir Project vide Memo No.641/R and R-A2/2012-2, dated 26.12.2014 of the 1st respondent, as per eligibility in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98 Irrigation and CAD (PW) Dept.dt.15.04.1986, as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, contrary to Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents-Authorities, to include the names of the petitioners in the seniority list under displaced persons quota of Kandaleru Reservoir Project and appoint in any suitable post.….”
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners’ lands were acquired by the respondents for the purpose of Kandaleru Reservoir Project and awards were also passed and compensation was paid. In fact, the petitioners have lodged a claim for consideration under G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (Project Wing) Department, dated 15.04.1986. However, surprisingly, the respondents have not included the petitioners in the list for consideration, though several others were considered and appointments were a