APHC010356942022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21671/2022 BETWEEN: 1. M. RAJ KUMAR, S/o. HANUMANTHRAYUDU, AGED 32 YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, MADAKASIRA VILLAGE, MADAKASIRA MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. B. RAJA SHEKAR, S/o.THIRUPATAIAH, AGED 34 YEARS, OCC: DRP, BUCHINAIDU KANDRIGA VILLAGE, BUCHINAIDU KANDRIGA MANDAL, CHITTOOR 3. D.MUNNI BABU, S/o. RAMANIAH, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC:DRP, MARADHAVADA VILLAGE, VARDHYAPALLEM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. K.PRAVEEN KUMAR, S/ OCC- EX DRP, MALLAVARAM VILLAGE, RENIGUNTA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5. D. VENKATARAMANA, S/ EX DRP, DHIGHVA BHATTAVARIPALLI, KALAKADA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 6. N.PANDURANGIAH, S/ DRP, GOTTIKADU VILLAGE, BALIAHPALLI MANDAL, NELLORE DISTRICT. 7. CH.RAMANAIAH, S/ DRP, MAILANLANGAM VILLAGE, DHORAVARISATHRAM MANDAL, NELLORE DISTRICT. 8. S. ANJANEYULU, S/ OCC: EX DRP, REDLAPALLI VILLAGE, BESTAVARIPETA, IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION No. 21671/2022 M. RAJ KUMAR, S/o. HANUMANTHRAYUDU, AGED 32 YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, MADAKASIRA VILLAGE, MADAKASIRA MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. B. RAJA SHEKAR, S/o.THIRUPATAIAH, AGED 34 YEARS, OCC: DRP, BUCHINAIDU KANDRIGA VILLAGE, BUCHINAIDU KANDRIGA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. D.MUNNI BABU, S/o. RAMANIAH, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC:DRP, MARADHAVADA VILLAGE, VARDHYAPALLEM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. K.PRAVEEN KUMAR, S/o. BALAKRISHNIAH, AGED 35YEARS, EX DRP, MALLAVARAM VILLAGE, RENIGUNTA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. D. VENKATARAMANA, S/o. CHINNIAH, AGED 43YEARS, OCC EX DRP, DHIGHVA BHATTAVARIPALLI, KALAKADA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. N.PANDURANGIAH, S/o. RANGIAH, AGED 36 YEARS, OCC DRP, GOTTIKADU VILLAGE, BALIAHPALLI MANDAL, NELLORE CH.RAMANAIAH, S/o. VENKATESH, AGED 31 YEARS, OCC DRP, MAILANLANGAM VILLAGE, DHORAVARISATHRAM MANDAL, NELLORE DISTRICT. S. ANJANEYULU, S/o. VENKATESWARLU, AGED 30 YEARS, EX DRP, REDLAPALLI VILLAGE, BESTAVARIPETA, [3330] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO M. RAJ KUMAR, S/o. HANUMANTHRAYUDU, AGED 32 YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, MADAKASIRA VILLAGE, MADAKASIRA B. RAJA SHEKAR, S/o.THIRUPATAIAH, AGED 34 YEARS, OCC: DRP, BUCHINAIDU KANDRIGA VILLAGE, BUCHINAIDU D.MUNNI BABU, S/o. RAMANIAH, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC:DRP, MARADHAVADA VILLAGE, VARDHYAPALLEM MANDAL, BALAKRISHNIAH, AGED 35YEARS, EX DRP, MALLAVARAM VILLAGE, RENIGUNTA MANDAL, CHINNIAH, AGED 43YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, DHIGHVA BHATTAVARIPALLI, KALAKADA MANDAL, RANGIAH, AGED 36 YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, GOTTIKADU VILLAGE, BALIAHPALLI MANDAL, NELLORE VENKATESH, AGED 31 YEARS, OCC: DRP, MAILANLANGAM VILLAGE, DHORAVARISATHRAM VENKATESWARLU, AGED 30 YEARS, EX DRP, REDLAPALLI VILLAGE, BESTAVARIPETA, 2 PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 9. B.RAJAIAH, S/o. TIRUPATHIAH, AGED 30 YEARS, OCC: DRP, DR.NO.13-23, KAVURU PANCHAYAT, CHILAKALURIPET, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 10. R.RAMESH, S/o. PENTIAH, AGED 30 YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, DR.NO.8-7, DUDDUKURU, DEVARAPALLI MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 11. M.NAGANJINEYULU, S/o. KRISHNIAH, AGED 34 YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, DR.No.1-192, JAJULAGUNTA POST, DWARAKA TIRUMALA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 12. .Y. VAMSI KRISHNA, S/o. SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED 3O YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, DR.No.1-34/1, YEDAVARU VILLAGE, AMARTHALURI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 13. B. RAMESH KUMAR, S/o. CHINNIAH, AGED 36 YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, BUEHINAIDU KANDRIGA VILLAGE, BUCHINAIDU KANDRIGA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 14. B.SUDHAKAR, S/o. SYAM BABU, AGED 32 YEARS, OCC: EX DRP, DR.No.5-11, SINGAGUDEM POST, TIMMAKAPALEM PANCHAYAT, LINGAPALEM MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ….PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT (RD), VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH SOCIETY FOR SOCIAL AUDIT, ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY (SSAAT)- DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT (RD), 1ST FLOOR, TAJ APARTMENTS NEAR GANDHI STATUE, INNER RING ROAD, REDDYPALEM, GUNTUR-522509. 3. G SRIKANTH, EX DIRECTOR, SOCIETY FOR SOCIAL AUDIT, ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY, (SSAAT)-AP. PRESENT ADDRESS NIRD, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): 3 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 pass an order or a writ particularly on in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the proceedings of the Director, SSAAT-AP, Mangalagiri Proc. No. 17/APSSAAT/ADMIN/2o22 dated io- o6- 2022 in which it is stated that the earlier Director SSAAT - AP issued reinstatement order dated 26-07-2021 is not legally valid, that the earlier Director's term of contract was ended and subsequently Director, SSAAT- AP was appointed, the earlier Director was relived on 12-07-2021 and that the termination orders passed by the Director is become final as illegal and void and consequently set aside the same as illegal and void and also be pleased to pass an order directing the respondents, particularly the respondent No.2 to reinstate the petitioners into their respective jobs in terms of the reinstatement order dated 26-07-2021 and also for the reasons that the orders of removal of the petitioners by the then Director are illegal and void and be further pleased to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. Y KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SPL C FOR NREGS(M S R CHANDRA MURTHY) 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV The Court made the following: 4 ORDER: The present Writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents in non implementing proceedings No. 87/AP SSAT/ADMIN/ 2019, dated 26.07.2021 and to set aside removal order issued vide proceedings No. 17/APSSAAT/ADMIN/2022 dated 10.06.2022, and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioners as DRPs in the office of the 2nd respondent with all service benefits. 2. According to the affidavit assertion, the petitioners were appointed as District Resource Persons (DRP’s) in the office of the Society For Social Audit Accountability and Transparency Department of Rural Development (hereafter for short called Audit Department) and the removal order passed by the respondents are not in the knowledge of the petitioner, and on the representation of the petitioners one officer by name G. Srikanth, on humanitarian grounds reinstated the petitioners into office vide order dated 26.07.2021, when the same was not implemented, petitioners filed W.P. No. 24150 of 2021, initially, this Court granted interim order dated 08.11.2021, directing the respondents shall not take any further steps to appoint District Resource Persons, if nobody else is appointed as on the date of the order, and the writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 29.04.2022 directing the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders on the request made by the petitioners for their reinstatement pursuant to the orders dated 26.07.2021 strictly as per law. 5 3. Pursuant to the said direction, the respondents have passed the impugned order removing the petitioners from the office vide proceedings dated 10.06.2022 and the said order is under challenge now in the present writ petitions on the grounds that the petitioners were appointed through regular process, on invitation of application through web-notification for fill up the post District Resource persons (DRP’s) by the Director SSAT-AP and the respondents have conducted written examination and the persons who were qualified in written test called for interview, the panel members conducted interview, and the same was approved by the Director SSAT-AP and ratified by the governing body and there is no need for going for fresh recruitment as such the removal order dated 10.06.2022 is unsustainable under law. 4. On the other hand the respondents’ contention through counter and oral argument by the respondents counsel is that the petitioners appointment is for one year and some of the petitioners were resigned and some were removed from the service and the procedure for appointment is issuance of public advertisement, inviting applications, holding interviews and selecting the persons of merit. The said procedure has not been followed in the matter of appointments of the petitioners. When the appointments are made without holding due process of selection, the reinstatement order that was given vide proceedings dated 26.07.2021 is not permissible under law and that would not confer any 6 right upon the appointees, hence it stated that the petitioners cannot claim for any equitable relief from this Court. 5. The court has specifically queried to petitioners counsel to place the appointment orders and they expressed their inability. And as seen from the impugned proceedings the appointment is for one year and the petitioners are out of service since the year 2017 almost for 9 years. 6. The Apex Court in the decision rendered in the case of Nazira Begum Lashkar & Ors vs State Of Assam & Ors reported in 2001 (1) SCC 143 has held as “Since the appointments to the posts are governed by a set of statutory rules, and the prescribed procedure therein had not been followed and on the other hand appointments have been made indiscriminately, immediately after posts were allotted to different Districts at the behest of some unseen hands, such appointments would not confer any right on the appointee nor such appointee can claim even any equitable relief from any Court. The apart, the appointments stood annuled hardly after six months from the date of appointments and the appointees cannot claim to be continuing for an unusual long period, so as to claim a humanitarian consideration in their case.” 7. This Court see no merit in the writ petition, accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. 7 As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 05.08.2026 Harin 8 120 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO W.P.No. 21671 of 2022 Date: 05-08-2026 Harin