APHC010390542024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3573] TUESDAY, THE 29th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 19808/2024 Between: 1. VUYYALA VENKATA SAMBASIVA RAO, S/O. V. VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/0.H.N0.7-479A, TIPPARLA BAZAR, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, APCPDCL, CORPORATE OFFICE, DR. YSR VIDUT SOUDHA, BESIDE POLYTECHNIC COLLAGE, ITI ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION APCPDCL, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR 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 to issue a writ order or direction more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus challenging the orders passed by the 2nd respondent vide Memo No.CMD/DIR/TECH/GM (HR), DGM-I/PO-II NO.328/23, dated 12.07.2023 in not modifying the date of regularization of the petitioner as 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008 as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust and consequently direct the Respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008 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 2 direct the Respondents No.2 to consider my representation 14.05.2024 by regularizing the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to fix an early date for hearing of W.P. 19808 of 2024 and expedite the hearing of W.P.No.19808 of 2024 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to seeking to direct the respondents to consider my appointment as 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008, for the limited purposes of promotion to be effected to the post of Junior Engineer, and effect promotions interns of the Memo.No.SE/0/GNT/PO(ADM)/C1/D.N0.1105/12, dated 06.06.2013, till the disposal of the Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 3 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to grant leave to the Respondents in the W.P.No.19808 of 2024 to file Counter Affidavit in the above writ petition and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 pleased to grant leave to the Respondents in the W.P.No.19808 of 2024 to file Counter Affidavit in the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Y MAHA LAKSHMI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENERGY 2. V V SATISH The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the 2nd respondent vide Memo No.CMD/DIR/Tech/GM(HR)/DGM-I/PO- II/D.No.328/2023, dated 12.07.2023, in refusing to modify the date of regularization of the petitioner as 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008. 2. Heard Smt.Y.Mahalakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Energy for respondent No.1, and Sri Abdul Mathews, learned counsel representing Sri V.V.Satish, learned Standing Counsel for APCPDCL, for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 3. Petitioner joined as Sub-Engineer on yearly contract basis in the Operations Section, Komarada Mandal, Vizianagaram District, in APEPDCL on 19.06.2006. Thereafter, petitioner got transferred from APEPDCL to APSPDCL on mutual basis with one M.Seshagiri, Sub-Engineer, Operations, Tsundur, vide Memo dated 10.01.2008. Accordingly, petitioner joined as Sub-Engineer on yearly contract basis in Operations Section, Tsundur, on 21.02.2008. As per the terms of appointment, on completion of two years of service under yearly contract basis, petitioner’s services are to be regularized. 4. The employees working under yearly contract basis in APSPDCL made a representation to the Chairman and Managing Director for regularizing their services, including those who had not completed two years of service. Pursuant to same, vide S.O.O.Ms.No.141, dated 03.10.2008, services of those employees were regularized. Accordingly, petitioner’s services were also regularized on the said date, though the petitioner had completed his two 4 years of service by 19.06.2008 itself. Thus, petitioner made a representation to the respondents seeking to regularize his service with effect from 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008. 5. As there was no response from the authorities, he filed Writ Petition No.10526 of 2023 and this Court, vide order dated 25.04.2023, directed the authorities to consider and dispose of the representation dated 28.08.2022 and pass appropriate orders. Pursuant to which, the respondents have passed the order impugned in the present Writ Petition. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the respondents have stated that a common date of regularization was assigned to all the persons, including the petitioner, by regularizing their services with effect from 03.10.2008, no reasons have been assigned in the proceedings dated 12.07.2023 for denying the petitioner regularization with effect from 19.06.2008, on which date he had completed two years of service on contract basis. 7. It is further submitted that counter affidavit filed by the respondents only speaks about the persons who had not completed two years of service were regularized by assigning the notional date of regularization as 03.10.2008. In the instant case, the petitioner had already completed two years of service on contract basis by 19.06.2008, as such, his case has to be considered on completion of two years. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the proceedings dated 01.01.2009, wherein it reveals that, in respect of 5 Sub-Engineers, regularization was taken place on the date of completion of two years service on contract period. However, the respondents have not assigned any reason for not considering the case of the petitioner with effect from 19.06.2008, on which date he completed two years of service on contract basis and the counter affidavit is also silent on this aspect as to what was the reason for not considering the petitioner’s case from the said date. 9. In view of the same, the order impugned in the Writ Petition i.e., Memo No.CMD/DIR/Tech/GM(HR)/DGM-I/PO-II/D.No.328/2023, dated 12.07.2023, is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted back to the 2nd respondent for fresh consideration and to pass reasoned order by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 28.08.2022, duly providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Date : 29-09-2026 BMS