APHC010318642023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3573] WEDNESDAY, THE 7th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 17241/2023 Between: 1. K KRISHNA PAWAN, S/O JAYAPATHIRAO, MAIN ROAD, RAJA BAZAR, AMADALAVALASA, TOWN AND MANDAL AGED ABOUT 34 YEAR, OCC. EX- TECHNICAL ASSISTANT GR- III, MAIN ROAD, RAJA BAZAR, AMADALAVALASA, TOWN AND MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT. ANDHRA PRADESH SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI , AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522503 2. THE VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, A.P.STATE CIVIL SUPPLY CORPORATION LIMITED, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, 74-20-5B, RAGHU GARDENS, VIJAYAWADA ROAD, CHOWDHARY PET, ASHOK NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 520007 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, SRIKAKULAM. 532001 4. THE DISTRICT MANAGER, A.P.STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION, 2ND FLOOR, DCCB BUILDINGS, G.T.ROAD, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, SRIKAKULAM. 532001 5. THE JOINT COLLECTOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT, SRIKAKULAM. 532001 ...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 allowing the petitioner into his duties as technical assistant in the office of the 4th respondent though extension order is there, vide proceedings No. Lr. No. P.ADMN 48(1) 2016 dt 14.02.2021. as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently directed the respondent to allow him into his duties as a Technical Assistant and deposit his salary in his account, for the extension period which is already released on his name, and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 continue the petitioner by allowing his duties in the of of the 4th respondent as technical assistant till disposal of the main writ petition, and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. UMASANKAR LOKANADHAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. UMASANKAR LOKANADHAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed for the following relief: “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 allowing the petitioner into his duties as technical assistant in the office of the 4th respondent though extension order is there, vide proceedings No. Lr. No. P.ADMN 48(1) 2016 dt 14.02.2021. as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently directed the respondent to allow him into his duties as a Technical Assistant and deposit his salary in his account, for the extension period which is already released on his name, and pass such…” 2. Heard Sri Uma Sankar Lokanandham, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Md.Saleem, learned Standing Counsel for A.P.S.C.S.C.L. 3. This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondents in not permitting him to discharge his duties as a Technical Assistant in the office of the 4th respondent, despite the extension order dated 14.02.2021. 4. On perusal of the record, it goes to show that, the extension order dated 14.02.2021in Lr.No.P.ADMN 48 (1)/2016, is only for the purpose of six (06) months with effect from 01.04.2021 to 30.09.2021. Continuation of his service would be based on need and necessity of the corporation. As such this Court is of the opinion that no direction can be issued to the respondent-Corporation to continue the petitioner. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had been working in the said post for more than five years during Kharif season and seeks a direction from this Court to consider his case, if any vacancies are available, duly taking into account his experience. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents contends that the petitioner may approach the respondent authorities for consideration of his case for re-engagement, as and when his services are required. 7. Upon consideration of submissions of both the learned counsel, this Court is of the opinion that this Court cannot issue such a direction as prayed for by the petitioner and deems fit to dispose of this Writ Petition as under: 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the respondent authorities by filing an appropriate representation seeking consideration of his case for re-engagement, as and when vacancies arise and his services are required by the Corporation and the Corporation may consider the case of the petitioner if his services are required. It is made clear that such consideration shall not confer any right upon the petitioner to seek regularization or any other benefit on the ground of continuity of service. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any, shall stand closed. ________________________________ JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Dated: 07.10.2026 M K K 43 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Writ Petition No. 17241 of 2023 Date: 07.10.2026 M K K