M.MOHAN RAO SRIKAKULAM vs M.D. AP STATE HOUSING COPR. & 3 ORS.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 17865

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)

2026:APHC:18132

WRIT PETITION NO: 16044/2011

Between:
1. M.MOHAN RAO, SRIKAKULAM, S/O. LATE CHANDRAIAH ASSISTANT ENGINEER, O/O PROJECT DIRECTOR (H), A.P. STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD., SRIKAKULAM.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. M D AP STATE HOUSING COPR 3 ORS, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, 3-6-184, URDU GALLI, HIMAYATHNAGAR, HYDERABAD-500 029.
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, A.P. STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD., 3-6-184, URDU GALLI, HIMAYATHNAGAR, HYDERABAD-500 029.
3. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, A.P. STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD., SRIKAKULAM.
4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER/ENQUIRY OFFICER, A.P. STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD., TEKKALI, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
5. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOUSING DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT
6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, A.P. STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD., AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT, AP RESPONDENT NOS. 5 AND 6 IMPLEADED AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 24-06-2024 VIDE I.A.NO. 1 OF 2024 IN WP NO. 16044 OF 2011.
...RESPONDENT(S):

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N

MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

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 toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the G.O. Rt.No.29, Housing (Vig.Cell) Department, dt.06-02-2014 issued by the 5th respondent as illegal arbitrary and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service duly granting all other consequential benefits and pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Main prayer amended/substituted as per C.O.dt 01.07.2024 vide I.A.No 2 of 2024 in W.P.No 16044 of 2011

IA NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP 19232 OF 2011

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 proceedings No. Vig.1/9902/SKLM/2009 dated 06.11.2010 issued by the 2nd respondent and consequential memo RC.No.Vig./9902/Sklm/2009, dated 20.04.2011 issued by the 1st respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition

IA NO: 1 OF 2015(WVMP 1397 OF 2015

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 vacate the interim order dated 09.11.2012 in WPMP No. 19232 of 2011 in WP No.16044 of 2011

IA NO: 2 OF 2015(WVMP 44351 OF 2015

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

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 permit the petitioner to implead the proposed respondents 5 and 6 as party respondent nos.5 and 6 in W.P.No.16044/2011 as well in Interlocutory Applications and pass

IA NO: 2 OF 2024

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 permit the petitioner to amend the main prayer as well as interim prayer and also wherever occurred in the affidavit as: “to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the G.O. Rt.No.29, Housing (Vig.Cell) Department, dt.06-02-2014 issued by the 5th respondent as illegal arbitrary and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service duly granting all other consequential benefits and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. INSTEAD OF “to declare the proceedings No.Vig 1/9902/SKLM/2009 dated 06-11-2010 issued by the 2nd respondent and consequential Memo RC No Vig /9902/Sklm/2009 dated 20-04-2011 issued by the 1st respondent as illegal arbitrary and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service duly granting all other consequential benefits and the above writ petition is pending before this Hon’ble Court and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.M KESAVA RAO

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY R

2.E V JAGANNADHA RAO (SC FOR AP STATE HOUSEING COOP LTD)

3.MALLIKHARJUNA MOORTHY K (SC FOR A.P HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED)

The Court made the following:

Date of reserve : 31.03.2026

Date of pronouncement : 29.04.2026

Date of Upload : 29.04.2026

ORDER:

1. The petitioner is challenging the issuance of G.O.Rt.No.29, dated 06.02.2014 issued by the 5th respondent and seeks a direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner as Assistant Engineer and extend all consequential benefits. The writ petition was initially filed challenging the proceedings dated 06.11.2010 and a consequential direction to reinstate the petitioner into service.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner su

Click Here to Read the rest of this document