SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 24205

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
SUBBA REDDY SATTI
Smt. K.Varalakshmi – Appellant
Versus
The State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
WP 1286/2025



APHC010020072025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3331]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 1286/2025 Between:

1. S MT. K.VARALAKSHMI, W/O. LATE P.NAGARAJU, AGED 49 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE, R/O. PLOT NO.11, PACIFIC PARK STAGE-2, GADAG ROAD, HUBLI, DHARWAD DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE-

580020.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE (CV 2 )DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

3. T HE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, APSPDCL, D.NO. 19-

13-65/A, TIRUCHANOOR ROD, SRINLVASAPURAM, TIRUPATL-517

503.

4. T HE GENERAL MANAGER HRD SPM, APSPDCL, D.NO. 19-13-65/A, TIRUCHANOOR ROD, SRINLVASAPURAM, TLRUPATI-517 503.

5. T HE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, TL AND SS, AP TRANSCO, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of respondents in not considering the representations dated 29-04-2023 and 30-06-2023 submitted by the petitioner for her appointment on compassionate grounds in view of death of her husband late Sri P.Nagaraju, who was appointed as Assistant Engineer (Electrical), AP TRANSCO, vide Order in T.O.O. No.(Per-GM) Ms.No.222, dated 26.06.1999 issued by the Director (D and HRD), Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Limited and who succumbed to Covid-19 virus on 08.09.2020 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to law and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner in any suitable post on compassionate grounds by considering the representations dated 29-04-2023 and 30-06-2023 and pass 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 direct the respondents to consider and appoint the petitioner in any suitable post on compassionate grounds by considering the representations dated 29- 04-2023 and 30-06- 2023, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. P L NARASIMHA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL

2. GP FOR SERVICES I 3. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following:

:: ORDER ::

The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent authorities in not granting/paying service benefits of late Sri P. Nagaraju, husband of the petitioner, who was appointed as Assistant Engineer (Electrical), AP TRANSCO as per orders in T.O.O.No.(Per-GM) Ms.No.222, dated 26.06.1999, died on 08.09.2020 (Ex.P3), as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Sri P.L. Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services appeared for respondent No.1 and Sri K. Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel appeared for respondents 3 to 5.

3. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner’s husband, who was appointed as Assistant Engineer (Electrical) as per orders in T.O.O.No.(Per-GM) Ms.No.222, dated 26.06.1999, died on 08.09.2020 (Ex.P3). He belongs to the ST community/Kammara Caste. The District Collector by proceedings in Rc.No.MC3/774/2000, dated 25.07.2006, cancelled the caste certificate. The petitioner’s husband filed an appeal and the same was rejected by the Government vide G.O.Ms.No.20 Social Welfare (CV.2) Department, 11.02.2008. Thereafter, the petitioner’s husband was removed from the service in 2009.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would also submit that the p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top