Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 18681 (AP)

N PEDA KOTAIAH v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/7110/2026 · 2026-03-12

D Ramesh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010123772026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] FRIDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 7110/2026 Between: 1. N PEDA KOTAIAH, S/O. LATE VENKATESWARLU, AGED 61 YEARS, SUPERINTENDENT, GUNTUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GUNTUR, R/O PLOT NO. 84, NGGO COLONY, VENUGOPAL NAGAR, GUNTUR 522 004 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522237 2. THE GUNTUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER-522002 ...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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in not considering the case of the Petitioner for promotion on adhoc basis to the post of Grade II Municipal Commissioner on the ground of Charge relates to year 2017 are pending is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the Guidelines issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in G 0 Ms No. 257 General Administration (Ser.C) Department dated 10.6.1999 and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and for a consequential direction directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Grade II Municipal Commissioner without reference to the Charge pending in Charge Memo dated 05.12.2021 and to pass…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion on ad hoc basis to the post of Grade-II Municipal Commissioner on the ground that charges relating to the year 2017 are pending is contrary to the guidelines issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh in G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999. 4. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner confined his submissions to a limited prayer, seeking a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999. 5. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submitted that the respondents would consider the case of the petitioner, if he falls within the zone of consideration, subject to his fulfilling all the conditions prescribed under the said G.O. 6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, and without going into the merits of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the learned counsel, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Grade-II Municipal Commissioner strictly in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.257, General Administration (Ser.C) Department, dated 10.06.1999, if the petitioner is within the zone of consideration, whenever the DPC is conducted. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE D RAMESH 13.03.2026 klk 56 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO:7110/2026 13.03.2026 klk