IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 31327 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1) M.Rakshna Kumar, S/o.Samuel, Age 54 years Working as Head Constable (G.No.1691), Nellore Unit, T.P.Gudur P.S. SPSR Nellore District. 2) Udatha Yedukondalu, S/o.Suryanarayana, Age 64 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.1683), Nellore Unit, South Traffic Nellore P.S SPSR Nellore District. 3) T.Prabhakar, S/o. Koteswara Rao, Age 54 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.1674), Nellore Unit, GSP Nellore P.S. SPSR Nellore District 4) G.Samuel, S/o.Swamidas, Age 57 years, Working as Head Constable, (G.No.901) Nellore Unit, Kodavaluru P.S., SPSR Nellore District. 5) Y.Papaiah, S/o.Chenchaiah, Age 57 years Working as Head Constable (G.No.492) Nellore Unit, APTRANCO P.S., SPSR Nellore District 6) M.G.R.Srinivasulu Reddy, S/o.Venku Reddy, Age 54 years, Working as Head Constable, (G.No.498), Nellore Unit, Indurukupet P.S. SPSR Nellore District 7) P.Jagadish, S/o.Kondaiah, Age 55 Years Working as Head Constable (G.No.502) Nellore Unit, T,PiGudur P.S. vSPSR Nellore District -4" e 8) A.Seetharamaiah, S/o.Seshagiri Rao Age 55 years, Working as Head Constable (G.No.508 Nellore Unit, T,P,Gudur P.S. SPSR Nellore District 9) D.lsmail Zabiulla, S/o.Jaffar Khan, Age 56 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.553) Nellore Unit, Duthaluru P.S. SPSR Nellore District V 10) T.Ramesh Babu, S/o. Raja Rathnam Age 57years,Working as Head Constable (G.No.573), Nellore Unit, VR Nellore PS SPSR Nellore District 11) M.Prasad, S/o. Seshaiah, Age 54 years Working as Head Constable, (G No 611) Nellore Unit, South Traffic Nellore P.S. SPSR Nellore District 12) M.Venkateswarlu, S/o.Sankaraiah, Age 56 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.614), Nellore Unit (Now Tirupathi Dist). Kota PS,SPSR Nellore District. 13) Vanka Chandra Sekhar, S/o. Venkataramaiah Age 56 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.625), Nellore Unit (Now Tirupathi Dist) Naidupet P.S., SPSR Nellore Dist. 14) K.Ravindra, S/o. Chennaiah, Age 56 years Working as Head Constable, (G. No.938) Nellore Unit, Krishnapatnam P.S. SPSR Nellore District 15) V.Vijayudu, S/o. Subbaramaiah, Age 55 Working as Head Constable, (G.No.958) Nellore Unit, Intelligence Vijayawada P.S. SPSR Nellore District. 16) Santuru Prasad Rao, S/o.John, Age 56 yc Working as Head Constable, (G.No.1170) Nellorer Unit, Chittamuru PS SPSR Nellore District years years -5- 17) Sk.Shabbir, S/o.Rahaman, Age 57 years Working as Head Constable, (G.No.43) Nellore Unit, Sangam PS SPSR Nellore District 18) S.Sundara Rami Reddy, S/o. Raja Rathnam, Age 56 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.116) Nellore Unit, South Traffic Nellore PS SPSR Nellore District 19) K.V.N.V.Prasad Rao, S/o.Rangaiah, Age 56 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.20) Nellore Unit, Dargamitta PS SPSR Nellore District 20)Dudi Venkateswarlu, S/o.China Krishnaiah, Age 54 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.1122) Nellore Unit, Intelligence Nellore Zone PS SPSR Nellore District 21)Syed Abdul Saleem, S/o.S.A.Khuddus, Age 57 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.1741) Nellore Unit, South Traffic PS SPSR Nellore District 22) Darla Bhaskar, S/o.Sundaraiah, Age 56 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.1386) Nellore Unit, Podalakuru PS SPSR Nellore District 23)Edupalli Koteswara Rao , S/o.Balaiah, Age 54 years, Working as Head Constable (G.No.1705) Nellore Unit, Women PS SPSR Nellore District 24)A.Mallikarjuna Rao, S/o.Subbaiah, Age 59 years. Working as Head Constable (G.No.1733) Nellore Unit, DSR Nellore PS SPSR Nellore District Petitioners / Petitioners 0^ -6 - AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government Home Department, A.P.Secretariat, Velagapudi, maravathi, Palnadu, Palnadu District. The Director General Police Mangalagiri, A.P., Guntur District 2. 3. The Inspector General of Police Coastal Range, Guntur District. The Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District, Prakasam 4. 5. The Superintendent of Police Bapatia District, Bapatia 6. The Superintendent of Police S.R.S.P., Nellore District At Nellore ...Respondents. 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, more particularly one in the of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in not G.O.Ms.No.212 Home nature implementing the Government Orders, issued in (Legal-ll) Department, dated 6-9-2013, keeping in view of the judgment of the Hon-ble Court in W.P.No.21172/2014 and Batch, dated 22-1-2015, in SLP.Nos.7325-7326/2015 dated spite of confirming the said judgment in 23-3-2018 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and not implementing Circular Memo.No.20871/Legal.II/A2/ 2014 dated 4-11-2015 Government giving effect to G.O.Ms.No.212 Home (Legal-ll) Department, dated 6-9-2013 orders of DGP., dated 14-12-2015 and Circular Orders of DGP., dated 22-10-2016 for granting Notional Seniority and promotion with effect from whose favour the S.P., Kurnool 1-1-2014 on par with our colleagues on passed orders on ‘19-12- 2019 and S.P., Palnadu, dated 12-6-2023, based on the orders of the Hon’ble High Court in 14443/2020, dated 3-8-2022, and rejecting the case in orders C.No.7177/A1/2024 dt.18.12.2024 as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially declare that the Petitioners are entitled for fixation of notional seniority with effect from 1-1-2014 with consequential benefit of promotion to the post of ASI., on par with their colleagues as per the orders passed by the S.P., Palnadu, dated 12-6-2023. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue an Interim order, directing the Respondents forthwith to consider the cases of the petitioners herein for granting notional seniority par with the persons in whose favour the S.P., Palnadu District, passed orders in C.NO.66/A1/2022/D.O.NO.529/2023 dated 12-6-2023, S.P.Kurnool passed orders on 19.12.2019 keeping in view of the orders of Government and DGP Circular dt.22.10.2016 representations of the petitioners dt.23.12.2024 23.12.2024 and 23.12.2024 pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners ; SRI P. V. RAMANA Counsel for the Respondents; GP FOR SERVICES The Court made the following: ORDER on in Memo No. 14443/2020, dt. 4-11-2015, duly considering the 3'"^ I APHC010600202024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0^:5 TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 31327/2024 Between: 1. M RAKSHNA KUMAR. S/O.SAMUEL, AGE 54 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.N0.1691), NELLORE UNIT, T.P.GUDUR P.S. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 2. UDATHA YEDUKONDALU S/O.SURYANARAYANA, YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.1683), NELLORE UNIT, SOUTH TRAFFIC NELLORE P.S DISTRICT. AGE 64 1» SPSR NELLORE ■} 3. T.PRABHAKAR,, S/0. KOTESWARA RAO, AGE 54 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.1674), NELLORE UNIT, GSP NELLORE P.S. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 4. G.SAMUEL,, S/O.SWAMIDAS, AGE 57 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE, (G.NO.901), NELLORE UNIT, KODAVALURU P.S., SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 5. Y.PAPAIAH,, S/O.CHENCHAIAH, AGE 57 YEARS WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.N0.492) NELLORE UNIT, APTRANCO P.S., SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 6. M.G.R.SRINIVASULU REDDY S/O.VENKU REDDY, YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE, (G.N0.498), NELLORE UNIT, INDURUKUPET P.S. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT AGE 54 7. P.JAGADISH S/O.KONDAIAH, AGE 55 YEARS, HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.502) NELLORE UNIT. T.P.GUDUR P.S. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT WORKING AS ) j SRS.J W.P.No.31327 of 2024 8. A.SEETHARAMAIAH,, S/O.SESHAGIRI RAO. AGE 55 YEARS, WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.508 NELLORE UNIT, T,P,GUDUR P.S. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 9. D.LSMAIL ZABIULLA,, S/O.JAFFAR KHAN. AGE 56 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.553) NELLORE UNIT. DUTHALURU P.S. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 10.T.RAMESH BABU,, S/0. RAJA RATHNAM 57YEARS,WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.573) NELLORE UNIT. VR NELLORE PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT AGE 11. M.PRASAD,, S/0. SESHAIAH, AGE 54 YEARS WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE, (G.N0.611) NELLORE P.S. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT NELLORE UNIT, SOUTH TRAFFIC 12.M.VENKATESWARLU S/O.SANKARAIAH AGE 56 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.N0.614), NELLORE UNIT (NOW TIRUPATHI DIST). KOTA PS.SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ) 1 13.VANKA CHANDRA SEKHAR,, S/0. VENKATARAMAIAH AGE 56 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.N0.625), NELLORE UNIT (NOW TIRUPATHI DIST) NAIDUPET P.S., SPSR NELLORE DIST. 14.K.RAVINDRA. , S/0. CHENNAIAH, AGE 56 YEARS WORKING AS HEAD (G.N0.938) KRISHNAPATNAM P.S. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT CONSTABLE. NELLORE UNIT 15.V.VIJAYUDU,, S/0. SUBBARAMAIAH, AGE 55 YEARS WORKING NELLORE UNIT, AS HEAD CONSTABLE, (G.N0.958) INTELLIGENCE VIJAYAWADA P.S. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 16.SANTURU PRASAD RAO,, S/0. JOHN. AGE 56 YEARS WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE, (G.NO. 1170) CHITTAMURU PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT NELLORER UNIT, 17.SK.SHABBIR,, S/O.RAHAMAN. AGE 57 YEARS WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE, (G.N0.43) NELLORE UNIT. SANGAM PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT .-18.S.SUNDARA RAMI REDDY, S/0. RAJA RATHNAM, AGE 56 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.N0.116) NELLORE UNIT, r SRS,J W.P.No.31327 of 2024 SOUTH TRAFFIC NELLORE PS. SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 19.K.V.N.V.PRASAD RAO. S/O.RANGAIAH. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.20) NELLORE UNIT. DARGAMITTA PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT AGE 56 YEARS. 20.DUDI VENKATESWARLU, S/0.CHINA KRISHNAIAH YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.1122) NELLORE UNIT. INTELLIGENCE NELLORE ZONE PS DISTRICT AGE 54 SPSR NELLORE 21.SYED ABDUL SALEEM. S/0 S.A. KHUDDUS. AGE 57 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.1741) NELORE UNIT. SOUTH TRAFFIC PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 22.DARLA BHASKAR., S/O.SUNDARAIAH. AGE 56 YEARS. WORKING (G.NO.1386) NELLORE UNIT. AS HEAD CONSTABLE PODALAKURU PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 23.EDUPALLI KOTESWARA RAO. S/O.BALAIAH. AGE 54 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.1705) NELLORE UNIT. WOMEN PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 24.A.MALLIKARJUNA RAO.. S/O.SUBBAIAH AGE 59 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.1733) NELLORE UNIT, DSR NELLORE PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT VELAGAPUDI, MARAVATHI, PALNADU, PALNADU DISTRICT. 2.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL POLICE. MANGALAGIRI, A.P.. GUNTUR DISTRICT 3.THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE COASTAL RANGE, GUNTUR DISTRICT. S/O.BALAIAH. AGE 54 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.1705) NELLORE UNIT. WOMEN PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT 24.A.MALLIKARJUNA RAO.. S/O.SUBBAIAH AGE 59 YEARS. WORKING AS HEAD CONSTABLE (G.NO.1733) NELLORE UNIT, DSR NELLORE PS SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT, GOVERNMENT VELAGAPUDI, MARAVATHI, PALNADU, PALNADU DISTRICT. 2.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL POLICE. MANGALAGIRI, A.P.. GUNTUR DISTRICT 3.THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE COASTAL RANGE, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, PRAKASAM SRS,J W.P.No.31327 of 2024 5.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BAPATLA DISTRICT, BAPATLA 6.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, S.R.S.P., NELLORE DISTRICT AT NELLORE ...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, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents in not implementing the Government Orders, issued in G.O.Ms.No.212 Home (Legal-ll) Department, dated 6-9-2013, keeping in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.21172/2014 and Batch, dated 22-1-2015, in spite of confirming the said judgment in SLP.Nos.7325-7326/2015 dated 23-3-2018, by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and not implementing Government Circular Memo.No.20871/Legal.II/A2/ 2014 dated 4-11-2015 giving effect to G.O.Ms.No.212 Home (Legal-ll) Department, dated 6-9-2013 orders of DGP., dated 14-12-2015 and Circular Orders of DGP., dated 22-10-2016 for granting Notional Seniority and promotion with effect from 1-1-2014 on par with our colleagues on whose favour the S.P., Kurnool passed orders on 19- 12- 2019 and S.P., Palnadu, dated 12-6-2023, based on the orders of the Hon’ble High Court in 14443/2020, dated 3-8-2022, and rejecting the case in orders C.No.7177/A1/2024 dt.18.12.2024 as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequentially declare that the Petitioners are entitled for fixation of notional seniority with effect from 1-1-2014 with consequential benefit of promotionto the post of ASL, on par with their colleagues as per the orders passed by the S.P., Palnadu, dated 12-6-2023 and to pass lA 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 be pleased to issue an Interim order, directing the Respondents forthwith to consider the cases of the petitioners herein for granting notional seniority on par with the persons in whose favour the S.P., Palnadu District, passed orders in C.NO.66/A1/2022/D.O.NO.529/2023 dated 12-6-2023, S.P.Kurnool passed orders on 19.12.2019 keeping in view of the orders of Government in IVtemo No. 14443/2020, dt. 4-11-2015, and DGP Circular dt.22.10.2016 duly SRS,J W.P.No.31327of 2024 considering the 3 representations of the petitioners dt.23.12.2024, 23.12.2024 and 23.12.2024 pending disposal of the Writ Petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.P VRAMANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES I 2.GP FOR SERVICES The Court made the following: :: ORDER :: Impugning the endorsement issued vide C.No.7177/A1/2024, dated 18.12.2024 (EX.P14) issued by respondent No.6, the above writ petition is filed. 2. Fleard Sri P.V. Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services - I appeared for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that all the petitioners were appointed as A.R. Constable on different dates in the year 1989, 1990 & 1991. They were converted as Constable in Civil in October, 2010. The petitioners are eligible for promotion to the post of Head Constable by October, 2013 and latest by 01.01.2014, against the vacancies available in the panel year of 01.01.2014. Learned counsel would also submit that the minimum period of five years for promotion to the post of Head Constable (Civil) was reduced to three years by G.O.I\/ls.No.212 Home (Legal-ll) Department, dated 06.09.2013. The said G.O. was challenged before Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.7186 of 2013 and batch by personnel in Civil Police. Initially the Hon’ble Administrative Tribunal has 3. SRS.J W.P.No,31327 of 2024 allowed O.A.No.7186 of 2013 and batch by a common order dated 30.01.2014 and set aside G.O.Ms.No.212 Home (Legal-ll) Department, dated 06.09.2013. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.157, Home (Legal.II) Department, dated 15.11.2014, cancelling G.O.Ms.No.212 Home (Legal-ll) Department, dated 06.09.2013. Against the order in O.A.No.7186 of 2013 and batch, W.P.No.21172 of 2014 and batch were filed. The Hon’ble High Court allowed the writ petitions dated 22.01.2015 by setting aside the orders passed by the Hon’ble AdministrativeTribunal. S.L.P.Nos.7325and 7326 of 2015 were filed, and were dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 23.03.2018. Thereafter, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.38 Home (Legal.II) Department, dated 02.04.2015, cancelling G.O.Ms.No.157 Home (Legal.II) Department, dated 15.11.2014. The Government issued circular memo No.20871/Legal.II/A2/2014, dated 04.11.2015 and directed the learned Director General of Police to take necessary action. In turn, the learned Director General of Police of Andhra Pradesh issued memo directing all the Unit Officers to send the Police Constables (Civil) who are eligible for promotion to the post of Head Constable (Civil) in terms of G.O.Ms.No.212 Home (Legal-ll) Department, dated 06.09.2013 for pre-promotional training course, in consultation with IGP, training, CO. 4. All the petitioners have completed three years of service as on 11.10.2013, are qualified and eligible for promotion to the post of Head Constable (Civil). Though the petitioners are eligible, their names were not included for pre-promotional training in respect of 1993 and 1996 batches. In 5. respect of Kurnool District, the Superintendent of Police, Kurnool vide D.No.1424/2019 C.No.AI/7904/2013-18 dated 19.12.2019 (Ex.P.6) considered 51 Head Constables for notional seniority for the years 2014 and 2015 as per the eligibility and seniority. Keeping in view, G.O.Ms.No.212 SRS,J W.P.No.31327 of 2024 Home (Legal-ll) Department, dated 06.09.2013 and the circular orders were issued by Director General of Police. The Superintendent of Police, Palnadu District also implemented the notional seniority in respect of 24 Head Constables, who were converted from A.R to Civil as per G.O.Ms.No.212 Home (Legal-ll) Department, dated 06.09.2013. 6. Each of the petitioners made their individual representations and the same were received by the office of respondent No.6 on 07.12.2024. Respondent No.6 by the endorsement impugned, opined that it is not feasible to consider the petitioners case. 7. Sri S. Raju, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services - I, submitted the instructions of respondent No.6, which is on the similar lines of impugned endorsement and would support of the order impugned. 8. As seen from the impugned endorsement (Ex.P14), the endorsement is running into three pages consisting of seven paragraphs. Up to paragraph No.5 of the endorsement, the representations made by the petitioners, order in earlier writ petition and the review said to have been filed by one of the affected parties are mentioned. Paragraph No.6 is only the paragraph considered by the respondent No.6 and opined that it is not feasible for consideration. 9. In S.N.Mukherjee Vs. Union of lndia\ the Hon’ble Supreme Court while referring to the judgment in Siemens Engineering & Manufacturing Co. of India Limited case, it is held as follows: 10. “It is now settled law that where an authority makes an order in exercise of a quasi-judicial function it must record its reasons in support of the order it makes. Every quasi-judicial order must be 1990(4) see 594 SRS,J W.P.No.31327 of 2024 < supported by reasons. If courts of law are to be replaced by administrative authorities and tribunals, as indeed, in some kinds of cases, with the proliferation of Administrative Law they may have to be so replaced, it is essential that administrative authorities and tribunals should accord fair and proper hearing to the persons sought to be affected by their orders and give sufficiently clear and explicit reasons in support of the orders made by them. Then along administrative authorities and tribunals, exercising quasi-judicial function will be able to Justify their existence and carry credibility with the people by inspiring confidence in the adjudicatory process. The 1 1990(4) SCC 594 4 rule requiring reasons to be given in support of an order is, like the principle of audi alteram partem, a basic principle of natural justice which must inform every quasi-judicial process and this rule must be observed in its proper spirit and mere pretence of compliance with it would not satisfy the requirement of law”. 11. At Para 35, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as follows. “Reasons, when recorded by an administrative authority in an order passed by its while exercising quasi-judicial functions, would no doubt facilitate the exercise of its jurisdiction by the appellate or supervisory authority. But the other considerations, referred to above, which have also weighed with this Court in holding that an administrative authority must record reasons for its decision, are of no less significance. These considerations show that the recording of reasons by an administrative authority serves a salutary purpose, namely, it excludes chances of arbitrariness and ensures a degree of fairness in the process of decision-making. The said purpose would apply equally to all decisions and its application cannot be confined to decisions which are subject to appeal, revision orjudicial review. In our opinion, therefore, the requirement that reasons be recorded should govern the decisions of an administrative authority exercising quasi judicial functions irrespective of the fact whether the decision is subject to appeal, revision or judicial review. It may, however, be added that it is not required that the reasons should be as elaborate as in the decision of a Court law. The extent and nature of the reasons would depend on particular facts and circumstances. What is necessary is that the reasons are clear and explicit so as to Indicate that the authority has given due consideration to the points in controversy. The need for recording of reasons is greater in a case where the 5 order is ^ passed at the original stage. The appellate or revisional authority. If it SRS,J W.P.No,31327 of 2024 affirms such an order, need not give separate reasons if the appellate revisional authority agrees with the reasons contained in the order under challenge”. Given the above observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court, this Court is of the considered view that the endorsement issued by respondent No.6 vide C.NO.7177/A1/2024, dated 18.12.2024 (Ex.P14) suffers from bereft of Respondent No.6 ought to have considered the representations objectively in view of orders passed in the earlier writ petition, SLR and circulars issued by the Government and the Director General of Police. Hence, the endorsement impugned is liable to be set aside. or 12. reasons. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is allowed by setting aside the endorsement issued by respondent No.6 vide C.NO.7177/A1/2024, dated 18.12.2024 (Ex.P14). The matter is remitted to respondent No.6. The learned Respondent No.6 shall consider the representations made by the petitioners objectively, keeping in view, the orders passed in the earlier writ petition, SLP and also circulars issued by the Government as well as the Director General of Police. There shall be no order as to costs. 13. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. 3D/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary to Government Home Department, State of AP, A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Palnadu, Palnadu District. 2. The Director General Police, Mangalagiri, A.P., Guntur District 3. The Inspector General of Police Coastal Range, Guntur District. 4. The Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District, Prakasam 5. The Superintendent of Police, Bapatia District, Bapatia 6- The Superintendent T- One CC to Sri P. 8- Two CCs to GP for 9- Three C.D. Copies. of Police, S.R.S.P., V. Ramana, Advocate fOPUCj Services I, High Court of Andh Nellore District At Nellore / ra Pradesh. [OUT] Cnr \ HIGH COURT \ 'i DATED:21/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.31327 of 2024 ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS