Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50098 (AP)

Pendyala Subrahmanyam v. The Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd.,

WP/22767/2016 · 2025-10-16

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010839182016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 22767/2016 Between: 1. PENDYALA SUBRAHMANYAM, S/O NAGESWARA RAO, AGED 38 YEARS, OCC:ASSISTANT LINEMAN, R/O H.NO. 9-144, NEAR MPDO OFFICE, RAMANAIAH PETA, KAKINADA RURAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE ANDHRA PRADESH EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LTD, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER HRD, A.P.EPDCL, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION CIRCLE, A.P.EPDCL, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. SRI K VIJAYA KUMAR, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED 38 YEARS, OCC: SUB-ENGINEER, BIKKAVOLU SECTION, RAMACHANDRAPURAM DIVISION, APEPDCL, OPERATION CIRCLE, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. L L PRASADA RAO, S/O. NOT KNOWN, AGED 38 YEARS, OCC: SUB- ENGINEER, RAMACHANDRAPURAM DIVISION, APEPDCL, OPERATION CIRCLE, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 6. Y SRINIVAS RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED 35 YEARS, OCC:SUB- ENGINEER, SAMARLAKOTA SUB-DIVISION, KAKINADA DIVISION, APEPDCL, OPERATION CIRCLE, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 2 7. SRI K SHYAM KUMAR, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED 33 YEARS, OCC: SUB-ENGINEER, KAPIIESWARAPURAM, OPERATIONS SECTION, RAMACHANDRAPURAM DIVISION, APEPDCL, OPERATION CIRCLE, RAJAHMUNDRY, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...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 toto issue a writ, order, or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing the speaking order vide Memo No SE/O/RJY/DE- T/PO/JAO/ADM/SA1/D.No.2049/15 dated 20-6-2015' and the action of the 1st respondent in issuing Memo No. BRD/MPS/MPP/E-2705/EPCOR- 06002(95)/25/20I5- MPS-2-COR/F.No.12743/16, dated 6-4-2016, ignoring the action of the 3rd respondent in appointing the respondents No.4 to 7 who are juniors to the petitioner, by the method of appointment transfer as Sub- Engineers vide Memos No. SE/O/RJY/PO/JAO/ADM/U1/D.No.2575/11, D.No. 2569/11, D.No. 2571/11 and D.No. 2574/11 dated 12-9-2011 as arbitrary, illegal and violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from contrary to the provisions of the APSEB Employees Service Regulations Part II and consequently set aside the rejection letter dated 20-06-2015 issued by the 3rd respondent and 6-4-2016 issued by the 1st respondent and direct the respondents No.1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner as Sub-Engineer with effect from 12- 9-2011 on par with the 4th respondent with all consequential attendant benefits including seniority and monitory benefits etc. IA NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP 27991 OF 2016 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 direct the respondents No.1 to 3 consider the case of the petitioner for appointment by transfer as Sub-Engineer in the existing vacancies as per his seniority, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SREENIVASA RAO VELIVELA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL) 3 The court made the following ORDER:- When the matter is called, Sri Ravi Kiran Rayalu, learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri Abdul Matheen, learned counsel representing Sri V.V.Satish, learned Standing Counsel for A.P.E.P.D.C.L, jointly submit that the petitioner has already been promoted to the post of Sub-Engineer, long back and the cause of filing of the writ petition has been fulfilled. 2. Recording the above said submission, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 17.10.2025 GVK 4 69 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.22767 of 2017 Date: 17.10.2025 GVK