Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14728 (AP)

POLIPONGU VIJAYA v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/10854/2024 · 2025-02-28

Subba Reddy Satti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010184082024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 10854/2024 Between: 1. POLIPONGU VIJAYA, W/O. POLIPONGULOKANADHAM, OCC HOME MAKER, R/O.DOOR NO. 18-7-20, OPPOSITE BAPTIST CHURCH. NEAR LOCO SHED, KHUDDOSNAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, SRI NAJANEYA TOWERS, ROAD, IBRAHIMPATNAM, AMARAVATI, VIJAYAWADA, N.T.R. DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-521456. ROAD NO.7-104, B- BLOCK, 4H FLOOR, N.T.T.P.S 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUPATI, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE DEPUTY DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, D.NO.6-14-7A, AMEDKAR COLONY, ALIPIRI ROAD, SRINIVAS NAGAR, MARRI CHENNA REDDY COLONY, TIRUPATI, ANDHRA PRADESH-517501. 5. THE MANDAL EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, R.C. PURAM, TIRUPATI, ANNAMIAH DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 6. THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL AUDIT, C/O. O/O. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL, 8TH FLOOR, STALIN SRS,J W.P.No.10854 of 2024 CENTRAL MALL, M.G. ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH- 52002. 7. POLIPONGULOKANATHAM, S/O. P. NAGAIAH, OCC RETD. SECONDARY GRADE TEACHER, M.P.P.S. KOTHAKANDRIGA, R.C. PURAM MANDAL, TIRUPATI, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 Order or direction, particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondent authorities in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 30.08.2023 made requesting for change of the name in the service record of the respondent no.7 in respect of the pension column in the service record of the respondent no.7 despite the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent no.7 and is eligible to be added as Family Pensioner illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art 14,15,19,21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent no.5 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 30.08.2024 duly adding the petitioner s name as Family Pensioner towards the pension column in the Service Record and pass 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 to consider the representation of the direct the respondent authorities petitioner dated 30.08.2023 duly promoting the petitioner to the post of „Assistant Director‟ in view of his „Deputy Director‟ from the post eligibility and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P JAGADISH CHANDRA PRASAD 2. GP FOR SERVICES III (AP) SRS,J W.P.No.10854 of 2024 The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondent authorities in not considering the representation made by the petitioner dated 30.01.2023, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing on either side. 3. Additional material papers were filed vide U.S.R.No.886 of 2025, dated 03.01.2025. Along with the additional material papers, a communication from the Mandal Educational Officer vide Rc.No.133/A/VRS/2024, dated 23.07.2024, was filed. In the said communication, it was mentioned as follows: “As verified in the service register the name of Smt P.Vijaya and his two daughters names were clearly recorded. The name of Smt.B.Santhakumari and her daughter name B.Jejisree was not recorded in the service register.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in pursuance of communication, as mentioned supra, no further adjudication is required in the writ petition. 5. Given the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is closed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date : 28.02.2025 TVN SRS,J W.P.No.10854 of 2024 225 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.10854 OF 2024 Date : 28.02.2025 TVN