APHC010007282026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 617/2026 Between: 1. MOHAMMAD SHEERIN BEGAM,, D/O. A. VALLI MAHMMED, AGED 38 YEARS, OCC- WARD ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY, PITHAPURAM MUNICIPALITY, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR CUM APPELLATE COMMISSIONER, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM. 3. THE PITHAPURAM MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): The Court made the following ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to issue an appropriate order or directions more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not modify the relieving order by correcting the petitioner name as Mohammad Sheerin Begam in the place of Smt. Shaik Begam Mohammad vide proceedings Roc.No. 73/2025/G2 dated 09.07.2025 as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, impermissible, discrimination and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to correct the petitioner name as Mohammad Sheerin Begam in the place of Smt. Shaik Begam Mohammad and issue necessary modification reliving order and to pass…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The present writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the 3rd respondent in not modifying the relieving order by correcting the name of the petitioner as “Mohammad Sheerin Begam” in the place of “Smt. Shaik Begam Mohammad” in the proceedings in Roc.No.73/2025/G2 dated 09.07.2025, which action is alleged to be highly illegal and arbitrary. 4. After receipt of notice, the respondents placed the service record of the petitioner before this Court. As per the service record, the name of the petitioner is recorded as “S. Begum Mohammad”. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that in the proceedings of the Regional Collector-cum- Appellate Commissioner, Municipal Administration, Rajamahendravaram dated 30.06.2025, the name of the petitioner is reflected as “S. Begum Mohammad”. The relieving order was issued based on the entries available in the service record of the petitioner. 5. It appears that in the relieving order the name of the petitioner was mentioned as “Mohammad Sheerin Begam”, whereas the service record consistently reflects the name as “S. Begum Mohammad”. When the official records maintained by the department clearly show the name of the petitioner as “S. Begum Mohammad”, and the orders have been issued on the basis of the said service record, there is no material placed before this Court to justify the claim of the petitioner seeking correction of the name in the manner sought for. 6. As no documentary material has been placed before this Court to substantiate the claim of the petitioner, this Court finds no valid grounds to interfere with the impugned proceedings. In view of the same, the writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D RAMESH 11.02.2026 klk 154 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 617/2026 11.02.2026 klk