##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:21963

APHC010162812026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI [3208]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF MAY

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH

WRIT PETITION NO: 10990/2026

Between:

1. K ASIPOGULA VEERAIAH, S/O.VEERANNA, AGED ABOUT 34

YEARS, OCC WORK INSPECTOR (OUT SOURCING), R/O. 3-20,

MITTAPALLE VILLAGE, ALLAGADDA MANDAL, NANDYAL

DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. T HE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETATY,

HOUSING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI,

AMARAVATHI, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

2. T HE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE

ANDHRA PRADESH STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD.,

KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT.

3. T HE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE HOUSING CORPORATION LTD,

REP. BY ITS PROJECT DIRECTOR, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT

4. S RI VENKATESWARA VEERANJANEYA MANPOWER AND

SECURITY SERVICES PVT LTD, REP. BY ITS MANAGING

DIRECTOR, KUMOOL, KUMOOL DISTRICT.

5. T HE A P CORPORATION FOR OUTSOURCED SERVICES, REP.

BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, 2ND FLOOR, NTR

ADMINISTRATIVE BLOCK, PNBS, VIJAYAWADA 520 013

2

2026:APHC:21963

...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 topleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in

the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents in

not allowing the petitioner to continue his services as Work Inspector on out

sourcing basis in the 3rd Respondent office without following due process of

law as arbitrary, illegal and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution

of India and consequently direct the Respondents to allow and continue the

petitioner as Work Inspector on out sourcing basis in 3rd Respondent office

in the interest of justice and 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 allow and continue the

petitioner as Work Inspector on out sourcing basis in 3rd Respondent office

in the interest of justice pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest

of justice and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. P NAGENDRA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. K MALLIKHARJUNA MOORTHY

2. GP FOR SERVICES I

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

This Writ Petition has been filed declaring the action of the

respondents in not allowing the petitioner to continue his services as Work

Inspector on out sourcing basis in the 3^rd respondent office without following

due process of law as illegal and arbitrary.

3

2026:APHC:21963

2. The learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents

have taken preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the

present writ petition basing on the observations made by the Division Bench

of this Court in T. Subba Reddy and others vs. State of Andhra Pradesh in

W.A.No.467 of 2023, vide its judgment dated 14.07.2023, the Division

Bench of this Hon’ble Court has held as under:

“9. Undisputedly there is no privity of contract between the official

respondents and the appellant. The recruitment was done by the

respondent No.3 the contractor. The petitioner was not engaged by the

respondent Nos.1 and 2.

10. With respect to the payment by the respondent No.2 out of escrow

account, in a similar matter, in W.P.Nos.12035, 12154 and 11898 of 2021,

this aspect was elaborately dealt in judgment dated 05.08.2021. It is apt

to reproduce the relevant part, as under:-

“Therefore, a reading of these clauses cumulatively leads to a

conclusion that in order to ensure that the amounts/salaries due

to the workers are paid to them this escrow account has been

opened. The account was not opened for any other reason

Normally, if a contractor is appointed he will raise a bill and

collect the amounts, but as the payment of salaries to outsourced

employees has become a matter of serious concern it was

decided in the meeting held on