1 APHC010709262018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 34346/2018 Between: S. Sankaraiah and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P V V SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 34346 of 2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents 1 to 3 in issuing circular dated 15.11.2016 and consequential termination orders issued in Rc.No.HR/1891/FA/2017 dated 08.09.2017 and also the appointment of Respondents 4 and 5 as Seasonal Mates / Senior Mates / Junior Mates in place of petitioners 1 and 2 was illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents 1 to 3 to continue the services of the petitioners as Field Assistants under MGNREG Scheme in their respective Gram Panchayats with consequential and incidental benefits attached to the posts and to pass…” 2. Heard Sri P.V.V. Satyanarayana, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, Sri M.S.R Chandra Murthy, learned Special Counsel for MGNREGS and learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners is not disputing about the fact that the petitioners could not achieve the targets as fixed by the authorities. The contract is not renewed again. Learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that the case of the petitioners can be considered for the list-II panchayats. 4. At this juncture, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that that cannot be done in the light of the circular instructions issued by the Commissioner to the effect that there is no automatic conversion of the person working in list-I Gram Panchayats to list-II Gram Panchayats in case of 3 reduction in generation of person days below 5000 vide letter dated 16.11.2016. 5. In the light of such representation, learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit that liberty may be given to the petitioner to submit fresh representations to the respondent No.2 and direction may be given to consider their representations according to law. 6. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the material on record, since there is no dispute about the fact that the petitioners could not secure mandays as per the contracts fixed by the respondent-authorities, their contract is not renewed. As rightly put by the learned Standing Counsel, in the light of the circular instructions of the Commissioner, there cannot be any automatic conversion. In that view, it is apposite to dispose of the petition with a liberty to petitioners to make fresh representations to the respondent No.2 and the respondent No.2 may take appropriate decision on such representations as per Governing Rules and law. 7. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________________ Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 08.04.2025 UPS 4 27 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.34346 of 2018 Dated.08.04.2025 UPS