Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioner representation and not including his name in the seniority list of displaced persons under the Kandaleru Reservoir Project, despite his eligibility under G.O.Ms.No.98 dated 15.04.1986, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for inclusion in the seniority list and for appointment under the displaced persons quota in terms of the said Government Order and in the light of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.4966 of 2026 dated 26.02.2026, and to pass

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 pleased to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation in accordance with law within a time frame as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the representation of the petitioner and not including his name in the seniority list of displaced persons for providing employment under the Kandaleru Reservoir Project under the Displaced Persons quota/employment as illegal and arbitrary.

2. The case of the petitioners is that he was displaced person affected in the Sri Pothuluri Veera Brahmendra Reservoir (in short, “SPVBR”) of Telugu Ganga Project, B. Mattam Mandal. The competent authority issued the displacement certificates to the petitioner. The land of the petitioner was acquired and the award was also passed by the 4th respondent pursuant to the G.O.Ms.No.98 Irrigation (Project Wing) Department dated 15.04.1986 and compensation was paid. In fact, the petitioners lodged claims for consideration under G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (Project Wing) Department, dated 15.04.1986. But, surprisingly, the respondents have not included the petitioner for consideration in the list, though several others were considered and appointments were also provided. The petitioner has made applications on several occasions disputing the action of the respondents in having considered some and not having considered the petitioner.

3. The petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that under G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (Project Wing) Department, dated 15.04.1986, without reference to the condition of one year limitation imposed in G.O.Ms.No.98 by taking into consideration the Government Memo No.480- LAR (2)/87-2, dated 24.08.1987 and the orders of A.P.A.T made in O.A.No.7917/2003, dt.16-07-2007 and Judgment of Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.2436 of 2011, dated 08.02.2011 which was confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP.No.14305/2011 by order, dated 04.07.2011 and also the common Judgment of this Court in W.P.(AT) No.174 of 2021 and batch, dated 13.12.2022.

4. In fact, the learned counsel for the petitioner also brought to the notice of this Court the observations in W.A.No.356 of 2023. Certain writ petitions, wherein rejection of the cases of the petitioners under G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (Project Wing) Department, dated 15.04.1986, was challenged, were allowed, and the appeals preferred therein were disposed of with the following observation:

“In this Connection it is respectfully submitted that recently this Court rendered an elaborate Judgment on the subject matter in W.P.(AT) No.174 of 2021 and batch, dated 13.12.2022 by considering all the earlier Judgments passed by APAT and the D.B. of this Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No. 2436 of 2011 which was confirmed by th