APHC010366692026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] WEDNESDAY, THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 19610/2026 Between: Musinada Durga Prasada Rao and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KAVITHA GOTTIPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.19610 of 2026 ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondent No.3 in re-fixing the seniority of the Petitioners in the revised Seniority List of Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspectors of Zone-II for the years 2003–04 to 2023–2024 by altering their dates of regularization as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The Petitioners were initially appointed as Junior Assistants in the years 1997, 1998 and 1999. In the course of time, they were promoted as Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspectors on a temporary basis on 10.02.2014, 09.02.2014, 09.02.2014, 10.02.2014 and 19.02.2014 respectively, in the vacancies meant for direct recruitment. Subsequently, Respondent No.3 issued Proceedings regularizing the services of the Petitioners in the cadre of Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspectors (for short, ‘P&ESIs’) with effect from 22.12.2020, 22.12.2020, 07.12.2019, 01.11.2020 and 30.10.2020 respectively. Subsequent thereto, their probation was also declared with effect from 21.12.2021, 21.12.2021, 06.12.2020, 31.10.2021 and 29.10.2021, taking note of the dates of regular appointment of the Petitioners in the cadre of Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspectors. Thereafter, a Seniority List was also issued on 24.04.2025. 3. While so, a Show Cause Notice was issued on 28.01.2026 stating that certain objections were said to have been raised before Respondent No.3 / the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Kakinada Division, Kakinada District, regarding the Seniority List. Thereafter, Respondent No.3 issued a Provisional Seniority List for Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspectors for the years 2017–2018 to 2023–2024. In the said Provisional Seniority List, the dates of 3 regularization of the substantive appointments of the Petitioners in the cadre of Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspectors were sought to be altered. Thereafter, the Petitioners submitted detailed objections, and without addressing the said objections, a Revised Seniority List was issued vide Proceedings dated 23.05.2026. Hence, the present Writ Petition. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that while examining merits of Seniority List, the date of regularization of the Petitioners in the said cadre cannot be altered in the absence of any challenge to the date of regularization. The learned counsel further submits that the Respondents could not have altered the date of regularization under the guise of a Final Seniority List. Learned counsel further submits that the Petitioners were appointed as Prohibition and Excise Sub Inspectors in the quota meant for direct recruitment in the year 2014 and there are errors in the calculation of the quota, which led to the issuance of the revised Seniority List. She further submits that if the quota is implemented in its true sense, the impugned Order cannot be validated. 5. Learned counsel further submits that the Petitioners had filed an appeal before Respondent No.2 under Rule 26 of the A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 on 30.06.2026. It is further submitted that as on date, eight vacancies are available and if the vacancies are filled up, Petitioners would suffer. 6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I submits that the revision of seniority is in conformity with Rule 3 Note-I(c) of the Andhra Pradesh Prohibition and Excise Subordinate Service Rules, and the Petitioners were rightly placed at the cyclic point. He further submits that as the Petitioners were regularized in a post which is meant for direct recruitment, the date of 4 regularization cannot be a ground to continue the Petitioners at the said cyclic point as that would be contrary to the Rules. 7. Heard the learned counsel. 8. There is some merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioners regarding the alteration of the date of regularization of the Petitioners under the guise of the Seniority List. Be that as it may, since the Petitioners filed an appeal before Respondent No.2 on 30.06.2026, it would be appropriate to direct Respondent No.2 to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions: i) The Respondent No.2 shall dispose of the appeal filed by the Petitioners on 30.06.2026 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. ii) Till the disposal of the appeal by Respondent No.2, the Respondent authorities shall not act upon the impugned Seniority List dated 23.05.2026 to grant further promotions. iii) There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 05.08.2026 eha 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WP No.19610 of 2026 Date: 05.08.2026 eha U