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

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 21277

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA
MUDDAPAPPU VENUGOPAL – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF AP – Respondent
WP 12247/2026



APHC010231552026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3329]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

FRIDAY,THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12247/2026 Between:

1. M UDDAPAPPU VENUGOPAL, S/O SANKAR RAO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC WORKING AS AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION OFFICER, GR.LL, O/O MANDAL AGRICULTURE OFFICE, VENIGANDIA VILLAGE, PEDAKAKANI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522034.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF AP, , REP. BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT AGRICULTURE COOPERATION DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522237.

2. T HE COMMISSIONER DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, OLD MIRCHI YARD, CHUTTUGUNTA CENTER, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH-

522004

3. T HE DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, COLLECTORATE COMPOUND, GUNTUR-522004.

...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 Mandamus declaring the action of the 2ND respondent in not considering petitioners representation dt 16.03.2026 for granting promotion to petitioner as Agricultural Officer on par with petitioners juniors as per the seniority list prepared by 2ND respondent vide No. A5(4)/2805123/2025 dt 25.02.2026 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 16, 19 and 21 P of Constitution of India and contrary to the Rule 33 (b) and 36(i) of APSSS Rules, 1996 and be pleased 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 grant interim orders directing the 2ND respondent to consider petitioner’s representation dt 16.03.2026 forthwith pending the disposal of above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. T V SRI DEVI Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 12247/2026

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India seeking the following reliefs:-

“to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering petitioner’ representation dated 16.03.2026 for granting promotion to petitioner as Agricultural Officer on par with petitioner’s juniors as per the seniority list prepared by 2nd respondent vide No. A5(4)/2805123/2025 dated 25.02.2026 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 16, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India and contrary to the Rule 33 (b) and

36(i) of APSSS Rules, 1996 and pass such other order.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the petitioner submitted representation dated 16.03.2026 requesting for promotion to the post of Agricultural Officer on par with his juniors as per seniority list prepared by respondent No.2 dated 25.02.2026, but still the same is pending for consideration. He further submits that without considering the representation and eligibility of the petitioner, the respondents are proceeding further with the process of promotions to the post of Agricultural Officer ignoring the candidature of the petitioner. Hence, the Writ Petition.

4. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader furnished written instructions, wherein it is stated as follows: “14.In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is respectfully submitted that there is no deliberate inaction on the part of Respondent Nos.1 and 2. The petitioner's representation dated 16-03-2026 is part of the ongoing process of examination of objections received against the provisional zonal integrated seniority list. The Department is already taking necessary action to verify the

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top