APHC010003852024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 12th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 370 OF 2024 Between: 1. K YEDU KONDALU, S/O.Gopaiah Aged 49 Years, Working As Junior Assistant, (Now posted to work in supernumerary post Junior assistant) 0/0. Deputy Executive Engineer NSJ,O and M Circle,SIFT Division,Vinukonda,Palanadu District. ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, Represented By Its Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Secretariat Buildings,Velagapudi, Amaravati,Guntur District. 2. The Engineerin Chief Admn Wing, Water Resources Department Governorpet, Vijayawada, Krishna District Now NTR District. 3. The Superintending Engineer, NSJC, O and M Circle, Lingamguntia, Narasaraopet, Palanadu District. 4. The Executive Engineer, NSJ, O and M, And SIFT Division,Vinukonda,Palanadu District. 5. M Yedukindalu, S/o. and Age Not Known, Junior Assistant, O/O.NSJC O and M,Division, Sattenapalli, Palanadu District. ...Respondents BM, J W.P.No.370 of 2024 2 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 to issue a Writ or Order more in the nature of Mandamus, to set aside the 3rd respondent Proceedings No. AB/EC-2/E-9-1 527M Dated.19.12.2023,served on 01.01.2024, where under the absorption of the petitioner as Junior Assistant in the ST Roaster Point 75, by the 3rd respondentvide ProceedingsNo.AB/EC-2/E/9/177-M dated.04.02.2015,is cancelled without notice as illegal, without reasons, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, and consequentially direct the official respondents to continue the petitioner as Junior Assistant in the ST Roaster Point 75, by upholding the 3rd respondent vide Proceedings No.AB/EC-2/E/9/177-M dated.04.02.2015,and 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 SUSPEND the 3RD respondent Proceedings no AB/EC-2/E-9-1 527M Dated:19.12.2023,served on 01.01.2024 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 grant leave to file counter affidavit in W.P.No.370 of 2024 in the interest of justice and may be pleased to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: K R SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES III (AP) The Court made the following order: BM, J W.P.No.370 of 2024 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed for the following relief: “ Pleased to issue a Writ or Order more in the nature of Mandamus, to set aside the 3rd respondent Proceedings No.AB/EC-2/E-9-1 527M Dated.19.12.2023,served on 01.01.2024, where under the absorption of the petitioner as Junior Assistant in the ST Roaster Point 75, by the 3rd respondent vide Proceedings No.AB/EC-2/E/9/177-M dated.04.02.2015, is cancelled without notice as illegal, without reasons, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, and consequentially direct the official respondents to continue the petitioner as Junior Assistant in the ST Roaster Point 75, by upholding the 3rd respondent vide Proceedings No.AB/EC-2/E/9/177-M dated.04.02.2015,and pass…” 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner entered his service in the year 1998 as attender. Thereafter, he possessed qualification of B.A. Graduate and got appointed by transfer as Junior Assistant on 25.09.2006. The services of the petitioner were regularized in the cadre of Junior Assistant on 07.07.2009. The petitioner was absorbed in the regular vacancy of Junior Assistant under S.T. roster to meet the adequacy in the year 2015 vide proceedings No.AB/EC.2/2-9-1/177, dated 04.02.2015. While he was working as Junior Assistant, the respondents have issued proceedings impugned in the Writ Petition vide proceedings No.AB/EC-2/3-9-1/527 dated 19.12.2023, whereby the petitioner who got absorbed on 04.02.2015 had been cancelled as the 5th respondent acquired intermediate qualification on October 2008, appointed the 5th respondent by transfer as Junior Assistant on the ground that the 5th respondent was senior in the initial cadre of attender as he was not qualified as on the date, as he could not get the required qualification, the petitioner’s case was considered at that time and the 5th respondent got qualification in the year 2008. Hence, keeping in view of the seniority of the 5th BM, J W.P.No.370 of 2024 4 respondent as he belongs to ST community, he was adjusted towards the vacancy under S.T. Category. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on Judgment of this Court in I.Subba Rao v/s State of Andhra Pradesh1, wherein it is stated as under: “…[6] There is no rule which enables the government to revert the persons promoted earlier solely on the basis that the persons that had necessarily to be passed over for want of qualifications had subsequently acquired the necessary qualification. This is not a case where the Government servants concerned were prevented for reasons beyond their control from acquiring the requisite qualifications. If the seniors failed to acquire the qualification, the blame could only be laid at their own door. Their inability was due either to want for intelligence or want of effort or diligence. If juniors, by dint of their superior effort or merit march ahead, and are promoted to superior ranks at an early stage, the employees who are more fit should not be supplanted so as to make room for the more backward or the less efficient among the service personnel. The survival of the fittest is more desirable and expedient rather than the promotion of the late comers who take their own time to become fit for it…” 4. The case in hand it is not the mistake of the petitioner, the 5th respondent had not acquired qualification, he was ineligible to be promoted as Junior Assistant as on the date of vacancy i.e., of the year 2006 and the petitioner was eligible to be considered and accordingly, his case was considered and got appointed as Junior Assistant by way of transfer from the post of attender and upon completion of probation, his services are regularized in the year 2007. Thereafter to meet the adequacy under S.T. category, petitioner was adjusted against S.T. roster in the year 2015. Now the respondent authorities, without issuing any notice and without providing an opportunity of hearing, had taken a decision to adjust the 5th respondent under S.T. Category in the cadre of Junior Assistant by cancelling the proceedings 1 1972 (1) AndhWR 370 BM, J W.P.No.370 of 2024 5 dated 04.02.2015 on the ground that the 5th respondent is Senior in the cadre of attender as he was appointed in the year 1984. 5. The respondent filed counter affidavit, wherein no plausible explanation was given except reiterating that the 5th respondent was adjusted against ST- Roster because of his seniority in the lower cadre upon his acquisition of qualification. It is not in dispute that, as on the date of promotion of the petitioner to the cadre of Junior Assistant by transfer from the cadre of Attender, the 5th respondent did not possess the requisite qualification, therefore, his case could not have been considered for promotion. The subsequent acquisition of the requisite qualification by the 5th respondent cannot operate to the detriment of the petitioner’s seniority in the promotional post, who had already rendered more than 17 years of service in the cadre of Junior Assistant. 6. On 24.06.2026, this Court permitted the learned counsel for the petitioner to take out personal notice to respondent No.5. In pursuance of the same, learned counsel for the petitioner filed memo dated 10.02.2026, stating that the notice was served on 5th respondent. Though the notice was served on 5th respondent, no appearance has been made on his behalf today. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed in the Writ Petition cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside for the following reasons. The petitioner was promoted to the post of Junior Assistant in the year 2006, whereas the 5th respondent acquired the BM, J W.P.No.370 of 2024 6 requisite qualification only in the year 2008. Therefore, as on the date of the petitioner's promotion, the 5th respondent did not possess requisite qualification for appointment or promotion to the post of Junior Assistant. Though the seniority of the 5th respondent in the cadre of Attender may not be in dispute, such seniority cannot confer any advantage upon him in the cadre of Junior Assistant, particularly when the petitioner had acquired the requisite qualification and was promoted to the post of Junior Assistant prior to the 5th respondent acquiring such qualification. Therefore, the subsequent acquisition of the requisite qualification by the 5th respondent cannot adversely affect the petitioner's position or seniority in the cadre of Junior Assistant. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. Apart from the above, while passing the impugned order, the petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing or nor issued any prior notice, which is against the principles of natural justice. 8. Considering the same, this Court is of the considered view that the proceedings No.AB/EC-2/E-9-1/527M, dated 19.12.2023, cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned order vide proceedings No.AB/EC-2/3-9-1 527M, dated 19.12.2023, passed by the 3rd respondent is hereby set aside. No costs. BM, J W.P.No.370 of 2024 7 Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any, shall stand closed. Interim orders granted earlier if any, also shall stand closed. ________________________________ JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Dated: 12.08.2026 M K K BM, J W.P.No.370 of 2024 8 186 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Writ Petition No. 370 of 2024 Date: 12.08.2026 M K K