IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI ^ (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 31795 OF 2018 Between: J.Vasanth Rao, S/o. late Sri. J.P. Subba Rayudu, Aged about 49 years, R/o.81-172 C3, Rama Krishna Nagar, B-Camp Post, Kurnool, Kurnool District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The A.P.S.P.D.C.Limited., Rep.by its Chairman and Managing Director Corporate Office, Tirupathi, Chittoor Dist. 2. Superintending Engineer (Operations), A.P.S.P.D.C.L. Kurnool District. Kurnool ...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 nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in issuing proceedings Lr.No.SE/0/KNL/DE-T/PO/IAO/ADM/S4/D.No.776/1 8, dt.27-03-2018 as illegal, arbitrary and set aside the same, consequently direct the respondents to fix the seniority of the petitioner on par with petitioners in W.P.No.17715/99 who are juniors to him in service in fulfillment of the Fundamental Rights Guaranteed under Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India lA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 direct the respondents to fix the seniority of the petitioner on par with petitioners in W.P.No.17715/99 who are juniors to him in service by suspending the proceedings Lr.No. SE/0/KNL/DE-T/P0/IA0/ADM/S4/D. No.776/18, dt.27-03-2018 issued by the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D KODANDARAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.2: M/s. ADARSHITHA KILARU, LEARNED COUNSEL REPRESENTING SRI VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA, Standing Counsel for APSPDCL Counsel for the Respondent No.1: M/S. ADARSHITHA KILARU, Jr. Standing Counsel The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010654132018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 31795/2018 Between: 1.J.VASANTH RAO, S/O.LATE SRI.J.P.SUBBA RAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/0.81-172 C3, RAMA KRISHNA NAGAR, B-CAMP POST, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1,THE A P S P D C LIMITED, REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR CORPORATE OFFICE, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DIST. 2.SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER OPERATIONS, A.P.S.P.D C.L,, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.D KODANDARAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL 2.ADARSHITHA KILARU,JR.STANDING COUNSEL FOR APCPDCL The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for; .... a Vi/rit of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in proceedings T/PO/IAO/ADM/S4/D.N0.776/18, dt.27-03-2018 as illegal, arbitrary and set aside the same, consequently direct the respondents to fix the seniority of the petitioner on par with petitioners in W.P. No. 17715/99 who are juniors to him in sen/ice in fulfillment of the Fundamental Rights Guaranteed under Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. ” Lr.No.SE/O/KNUDE- issuing 1 81 2 Heard Sri D.Kodanda Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner 2. and Ms.Adarshitha Kilaru, learned counsel representing Sri Venkata Rama Rao Kota, learned Standing Counsel for APSPDCL. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner is a 3. B.A graduate and possessed English and Telugu Typewriting Higher. He was appointed as a Typist in the year 1987 on contract basis in the Respondent- Corporation. Learned counsel would further submit that, in spite of several representations and the writ petitions filed by the Petitioner along with others, the Respondent-Authorities have not considered the seniority of the Petitioner herein on part with the Petitioners in W.P.No.17715/1999, who are juniors to the Petitioner herein, which is contrary to the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel would submit that the Petitioner has not possessed required educational qualification to be appointed as LDC/Typist as per B.P.Ms.No.36 dated 18.05.1997. It is further submitted that the Petitioner was appointed on 24.09.2008 and his probation and seniority were fixed from the same date. Learned Standing Counsel would submit that 4. the representation dated 21.08.2017 of the Petitioner seeking seniority on part with the Petitioners in W.P.No.17715 of 1999 was rejected since the Petitioner herein is not a similarly placed individual. Admittedly, the Petitioner has been working as a Typist since 1987 on contract basis in the Respondent-Corporation having possessed the requisite 5. Educational as well as Technical qualifications. The Petitioner herein along 3 with other similarly placed contract labour had filed W.P.No.3028 of 2000 before the Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh seeking a direction to the Respondents to regularize their services in terms of B.P.Ms.No.36, dated 18.05.1997. During pendency of the said Petition, Petitioners 2 to 4 therein had withdrawn the said petition. Subsequently, W.P.No.3028 of 2000 was allowed vide Order dated 07.03.2007, in favour of the Petitioner herein. wherein. Respondents were directed to consider the case of the Petitioner for regular appointment as LDC/Typist in accordance and to pass appropriate order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of the said Order. As the Respondent had not implemented the said orders, the Petitioner herein filed Contempt Case No.780 of 2007 in W.P.No.3028 of 2000 and the Respondent had issued appointment orders dated 19.09.2008 subject to the result of writ appeal. Inspite of several representations of the Petitioner to consider his 6. seniority on part with the Petitioners in W.P.No.17715 of 1999, as the Respondent did not consider the same, he filed W.P.No.2312 of 2018 before this Court questioning the inaction of the Respondents in not consideration his representation, and the said petition was disposed of directing the Respondents to consider his representation within six weeks from the date of In accordance with the orders in receipt of copy of the said Order. W.P.No.2312 of 2018 dated 29.01.2018, the Respondent had issued speaking dated Lr.No.SE/0/KNL/DET/PO/JAO/ADM/S4/D.No.776/18 27.03.2018 and rejected the representation of the Petitioner stating that there order vide 4 is no similarity between the Petitioner herein and the Petitioners in V\/.P.No.17715 and there are no orders for applying the same to all cases who were appointed under B.P.Ms.No.36. As rightly put by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, as seen from the 7. appointment order of the Petitioner dated,19.09.2008, it is clearly mentioned therein that the said order was subject to outcome of W.P.No.17715 of 1999. Admittedly, the Petitioners in W.P.No.17715 of 1999 are juniors to the Petitioner herein as contract labour and the Petitioner joined as Contract Labour (Typist) in the year 1987 and the Petitioners in W.P.No.17715 of 1999 joined in the year 1997. 8. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court is of the view that the Petitioners in W.P.No.17715 of 1999 and the present Petitioner are on the same footing and hence, the same may be extended to the Petitioner herein also. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Respondents 9. to fix the notional seniority of the Petitioner on par with the Petitioners in W.P.No.17715 of 1999, without any monetary benefit. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT,REGISTRAR closed. / //TRUE COPY// To, SECtTDN OFFICER Managing Director, Office, Tirupathi, Chittoor Dist. (Operations), A.P.S.P.D.C. Limited, Corporate A.P.S.P.D.C.L., Kurnool, 3. One CC to SRI D KODANDARAMI REDDY Advocate [OPUC] ApSp'bcL°A®vo'clfe'''[g)^?cr^^ Counsel For [OPUC]^ adarshitha KILARU, Junior Standing Counsel 6. Three CD Copies gsg HIGH COURT DATED; 29/04/2025 ORDER WP.No.31795 of 2018 zo^Of andj^ o oVi 17 JUN 2J25 mji rS- ★ V DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS