Devisetty Srinivasa Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
WP/2661/2024 · 2026-06-29
Balaji Medamalli
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3878 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 3878 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Date of reserved for orders : --- Date of pronouncement : 30.06.2026 Date of uploading : 30.06.2026 APHC010048682024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3573] TUESDAY, THE 30th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 2661/2024 Between:
1. DEVISETTY SRINIVASA RAO,, S/O LATE VENKATA RAO, AGED 56 YEARS, WORKING AS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, PRESENTLY WORKING IN THE OFFICE OF THE RTO, GUDIWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY, TRANSPORT, ROADS AND BUILDINGS, A.P.
SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANDB DEPARTMENT, STATE OF A.P., PANDIT NEHRU BUS STATION COMPLEX, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA 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 topleased to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and declare the action of the respondents in dening to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of RTO on mere pendency of Recommendations to initiate disciplinary proceedings vide Report of the ACB dated 16-2-2017, in the obsence of any valid Charge or Charge Memo, as on today, as illegal arbitrary discrimination
2
and violation of Principles of Natural Justice, and contrary the existing Government Orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.66 GAD (SERVICERS.C) Department, dated 30-1-1991 and contraty to the law settled by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No. 3315 of 2019 (DB) Dated 23- 1-2020, consequently direct the respondents herein to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Regional Transport Officer (RTO) in the existing vacancy, without reference to the pendency of Recommenatations of the D.G. ACB, Dated 16-02- 2017, in terms of the G.O.Ms.No. 66 GAD Department, Dated 30-1- 1991, and on the same analogy of similar orders passed W.P.No.28416 of 2022, dt 6-9-2022, and W.P.No. 5981 of 2021, dated 16-3- 2021 (which were implemented by the Respondents herein), and to 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 pleased to direct the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of RTO in the existing vacancy in terms of the G.O.Ms.No. 66 GAD, dated: 30-1-1991, on the same analogy of similar orders passed by Division Bench in W.P.No. 5981 of 2021 dt: 16-3-2021 without reference to the recommendations of the ACB, dated: 16-2-2017, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.
CHILAMKURTHI SATYA DEV NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES II (AP) The Court made the following:
3
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 2661/2024 ORDER
1. The Writ Petition is filed to declare the action of the respondents in denying consideration of the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Regional Transport Officer on the mere pendency of recommendations to initiate disciplinary proceedings vide the Report of the ACB dated 16.02.2017, in the absence of any valid charge or charge memo. 2. This Court initially granted interim directions to the respondent authorities to consider the case of the writ petitioner for promotion to the post of Regional Transport Officer without reference to the proceedings dated
16.02.2017. 3. Pursuant to the same, the respondent authorities have considered the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Regional Transport Officer. Hence, nothing survives in the Writ Petition for adjudication. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ BALAJI MEDAMALLI, J Date: 30.06.2026 SSA
Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No
4
5
78 THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI
WRIT PETITION NO: 2661 of 2024
Date: 30.06.2026 SSA