Remanded

Alavala Rohini v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC12 Sept 2024WP/20194/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the non-inclusion of their names in the promotion panel for Agricultural Officers, alleging arbitrariness and violation of service rules. The Court directed the Director of Agriculture to consider their representation within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.3 to consider the representation dated 29.08.2024 and pass appropriate orders within three weeks.

Alavala Rohini Vs the State of Andhra… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVAJl (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA" WRIT PETITION NO: 20194 OF 7C)9d -

¶5

Between:

¶6

Alavala Rohini, W/o.Suresh, aged about 37 years. Agricultural

¶7

Extensional Officer (AEO), Grade-ll, Lam Village Tadikonda Mandal Guntur District.

¶8

Ala Siva Nagamani, W/o.Rajesh aged about 35 years. Agricultural

¶9

Extensional Officer (AEO), Grade-ll, Ananthavarappadu Village

¶10

Vatticherukuru Mandal, Guntur District.

¶11

Karanki Lakshmi Prasanna, W/o.Sridhar Sunil Goud, aged about 35

¶12

years. Agricultural Extensional Officer (AEO) Grade-ll, Amartaluru Village and Mandal, Bapatia District.

¶13

Muddapappu Venugopal, S/o.Sankara Rao, aged about 43 years

¶14

Agricultural Extensional Officer (AEO), Grade-ll, Venigandia village Pedakakani Mandal, Guntur District.

¶15

...PETITIONERS

¶16

AND

¶17

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Through the Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶18

The Commissioner of Agricultural, O/o. Commissioner and Director of Agriculture Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶19

The Director of Agriculture. Old Mirchi Yard, Chutugunta Center Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶20

...RESPONDENTS

¶21

¶22

Petition under Article 22rof the Constitution of India praying thafln the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in non consideration of the Petitioners Representation dt 29-08-2024 while preparing the list for promotion for the post of Agricultural Officers for the panel year, 2024-25 ignoring the final seniority list vide and Memo bearing nd No.A5(1)73/2019, dt Sep., 2020, issued by the 2 Respondent as arbitrary. illegal and violative of A.P. Agricultural Service Rules as notified under G.O.M.S.No.23 dt 29-04-2021 issued by the 1 Respondent and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the case of the Petitioners in terms of A.P. Agricultural Service Rules...-

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 9n9A

¶24

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 to direct the Respondents to consider to dispose of the objections dt.29-08- 2024 before giving effect of promotions as Agricultural Officers in Zone No-Ill of State under Memo dt; August, 2024 issued by the 3 Respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY ^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR AGRICULTURE The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

¶26

’ APHC010396302024

¶27

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶28

[3333]

¶29

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶30

FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶31

PRESENT

¶32

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶33

WRIT PETITION NO: 20194/2024

¶34

Between:

¶35

Alavala Rohini and Others

¶36

...PETITIONER(S)

¶37

AND

¶38

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶39

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶40

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶41

I.SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY

¶42

Counsel for the Respondent{S):

¶43

1.GP FOR AGRICULTURE

¶44

The Court made the following:

¶45

¶46

ORDER:

¶47

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the^{ConstitutionofIndia}

¶48

seeking the following relief;-

¶49

“....fo issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particuiarly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus deciaring the action of the respondents^{innonconsiderationofthe} Petitioners Representation dated 29.08.2024 white preparing the list for promotion for the post of Agricultural Officers for the panel year 2024-25 ignoring the final seniority list vide and Memo bearing No.A5173/2019 dated September, 2020 issued by the 2"“^ Respondent as arbitrary, illegal and violative of A.P. Agricultural Service Rules as notified under G.O.M.S.No.23, dated 29.04.2021 issued by the f Respondent and consequently direct the Respondents to consider the^{caseofthePetitionersinterms} of A.P. Agricultural Service Rules...."

¶50

Today when the matter came up for hearing, learned^{counselforthe} petitioners reiterated the contentions urged in the Writ Petition, but, however limited his request to direct the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation of the petitioners dated 29.08.2024, requesting to take action to proceed with promotions in a continuous manner from SI.No.30, which was finalized in the panel year 2020-2021.

¶51

On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Agriculture^submits that the respondent authorities will consider the representation made by the petitioners, dated 29.08.2024 and will pass appropriate^{ordersinaccordance} with law.

¶52

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents, instead of going into the merits of the case, this Court feels it

¶53

¶54

appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing respondent No.3-The Director of Agriculture, Guntur District to consider the representation made by the petitioners dated 29.08.2024 and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶55

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed^{of.Thereshallbe} no order as to costs.

¶56

As a sequel. Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, in this Writ

¶57

Petition, shall stand closed.

¶58

//TRUE COPY//

¶59

Sd/- M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR /-sectTon OFFICER

¶60

¶61

The Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation Secretariat, State of Andhra Pradesh, Velagapudi, Amaravathi Guntur District.

¶62

The Commissioner of Agricultural, O/o. Commissioner and Director of Agriculture Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶63

The Director of Agriculture, Old Mirchi Yard, Chutugunta Center Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh.

¶64

One CC to Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarty, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP for Agriculture, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶65

Three CD Copies.

ssb

HIGH COURT

DATED:13/09/2024

ORDER

WP.No.20194 of 2024

I" 3 0 SEP 20?'! ™
^ Current Section
pat c

¶72

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

Alavala Rohini v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alavala Rohini v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Simma Usha, Srikakulam Dist.,a.P. Vs the Dist.Project Director, Woman,Child,Srikakulam, and 5 Otrs.

P. Geetha Rani, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal

B.Subba Reddy, Krishna Dist. Vs the State of a.P.,Endowments,Hyd.,and 3 Otrs.

S.R.M.Rama Bhupathi Dev, Wg Dist Vs Prl. Secretary, Agrl. * Co-Op Dept., Hyd and 2 Others

Kotapati Lakshminarayana, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

S Bhavani Shankar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh