Thippireddy Chandra Sekhar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
WP/14316/2026 · 2026-06-15
Nyapathy Vijay
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3078 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3078 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010270242026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 14316/2026 Between: Thippireddy Chandra Sekhar ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. PAVULURI SREENIVASULU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following:
2
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY Writ Petition No:14316 /2026 O R DE R:
The Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondent for not considering the representations of the Petitioner dated 16.08.2024 and 21.08.2024 for re-appointment of the Petitioner as Shift Operator in the respondent Corporation. 2. The Petitioner was appointed as a Shift Operator in APSPDCL at the Kethigunta Sub Station in the year 2010 on a contract basis. While so, on account of an incident which led to the death of a Junior Lineman by the name of Dasari Venkateswarlu on 08.10.2022 while doing work on an electrical pole after receiving a complaint, a criminal case was registered vide F.I.R. No. 103/2022 against the Petitioner. Subsequently, a Charge Sheet was also filed for the offences punishable under Section 304 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(va) of the SCs and STs (POA) Amendment Act, 2015. On account of the involvement of the Petitioner in the criminal case, the respondent authorities terminated the services of the Petitioner from
08.10.2022. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the allegations against the Petitioner are yet to be established in a criminal Court and the Petitioner could not have been terminated on mere allegations. 4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for APSPDCL would submit that the order of termination was passed in the year 2022 and there was a substitute appointment in the place where the Petitioner. He further submits that the representations of the Petitioner would be considered subject to availability of posts. 3
5. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: i) The Respondent-authorities are directed to consider the
representations of the Petitioner dated 16.08.2024 and
21.08.2024 for re-appointment of the Petitioner as Shift Operator
as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three
(03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. ii) There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Petition shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
Date: 16.06.2026 eha
4
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
W.P.No.14316 of 2026 Dated: 16.06.2026
eha