B. Balakoti Naik Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

K.PAVAN KUMAR, S/O LATE K, NAGARAJA SARMA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC - EX-HOME GUARD WITH NO 339 OF MADANAPALLE HOME GUARD UNIT R/O D NO 3-142-1, BAZAAR STREET, GURRAMKONDA VILLAGE AND MANDAL - 517 291, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH..

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME (LEGAL II) DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI - 522 503, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶14

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MANGALAGIRI - 522 502, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶15

THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, . HOME GUARDS, ANDHRA PRADESH MANGALAGIRI - 522 502, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶16

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR - 517 001 ANDHRA PRADESH...

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

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 an order or direction more particularly one in the

¶19

2

¶20

nature of Writ of MANDAMUS by declaring the action of the respondent authorities in issuing impugned removal order. in in D.O. No. 3/2014 (C. No. B3/HGs/ 2943/2013) dated 01.02.2014, passed by The Superintendent of Police, Chittoor removing the petitioner from the. service of the Home Guards and consequential proceedings Re. No. 353/HGs-Esst/2019-3 dated 19.03.2021 of 3,-d respondent as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Art 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to Principles of Natural Justice, apart from violative of Rule 7 (4) of the A.P. Home Guards Rules and the same liable to be set aside and consequently set aside the impugned rejection order in Re. No. 363/HGs-Esst/2019-3 dated 19.03.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent by re-enrolling the petitioner with all consequential benefits at the earliest

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶22

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 impugned rejection order Rc. No. 353/HGs-Esst/20193 dated 19.03.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent by re-enrolling the petitioner with all consequential benefits at the earliest and pass

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶24

1.K SRINIVASA PRASAD

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶26

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶27

WRIT PETITION NO: 9638/2021

¶28

Between:

¶29

A. SUMAN, S/O LATE A. VENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC - EX-HOME GUARD NO 385 MADANAPALLE HOME GUARD UNIT R/O EGUVA AMILEPALLI, H/O DIGUVA AMILEPALLI, GURRAMKONDA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT..

¶30

...PETITIONER

¶31

AND

¶32

THE STATE OF AP, THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME (LEGAL II)

¶33

3

¶34

DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI - 525 503, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶35

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE GOVERNMENT, OF ANDHRA PRADESH MANGALAGIRI - 522 502 GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶36

THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE HOME GUARDS, , GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADESH MANGALAGIRI - 522 502, GUNTUR DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH

¶37

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR - 517 001 ANDHRA PRADESH..

¶38

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶39

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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS by declaring the action of the respondent authorities in rejecting the petitioner s case for reinstatement vide Memo Rc. No. 310/HGs.Estt 2019 15 dated 10.02.2021 as Home Guard is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to Art 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, violative of Principles of Natural Justice and the same is liable to be set aside and consequently direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of petitioner for re enrolment as Home Guard with immediate effect

¶40

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶41

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 direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of petitioner for re-enrolment as Home Guard forthwith

¶42

IA NO: 2 OF 2021

¶43

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 permit the petitioner for amendent of prayer by including the "Memo No. 310/HGs.Estt/2019-11 dated 13-02-2020" before "memo Rc. 310/HG.Esst/2019-2015 dated 10-02-2021

¶44

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶45

4

¶46

1.K SRINIVASA PRASAD

¶47

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶48

1.GP FOR HOME

¶49

2.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶50

WRIT PETITION NO: 12859/2021

¶51

Between:

¶52

MALLELA CHANDRASEKHAR, S/O M. RAMACHANDRUDU AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC . EX-HOME GUARD WITH NO 335 OF CHITTOOR HOME GUARD UNIT R/O D NO 9-303 B, KUMMARI STREET, VEMPALLE VILLAGE AND MANDAL - 516 329, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH..

¶53

...PETITIONER

¶54

AND

¶55

THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME (LEGAL II) DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI - 522 503, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶56

THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE HOME GUARDS, ANDHRA PRADESH MANGALAGIRI - 522 502, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶57

THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, HOME GUARDS, ANDHRA PRADESH VIJAYAWADA 520 010, KRISHNA DISTRICT

¶58

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR - 517 001 ANDHRA PRADESH...

¶59

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶60

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 toto issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS by declaring the action of the respondent authorities in issuing impugned removal order.in D.O. No. 31/2007-B7/HG/48/2009 dated 27.07.2009 passed by the 4th respondent and consequential order in rejecting the dim of the petitioner for reinstatement in to service in Re. No. 336/HGs

¶61

5

¶62

Estt/212-04 dated 05.03.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Art .14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to Principles of Natural Justice, apart from violative of Rule 7 (4) of the A.P. Home Guards Rules and the same liable to be set aside and consequently set aside the impugned removal order Re. No. 336/HGs Estt/212-04 dated 05.03.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent by re-enrolling the petitioner with all consequential benefits at the earliest and pass

¶63

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶64

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 be pleased to set aside the impugned removal order Rc. No. 336/HGs Estt/212-04 dated 05.03.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent by re-enrolling the petitioner with all consequential benefits at the earliest and pass

¶65

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶66

1.K SRINIVASA PRASAD

¶67

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶68

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶69

WRIT PETITION NO: 12886/2021

¶70

Between:

¶71

C BHASKAR REDDY, S/O C.SIDDA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC. HOME GUARD (REMOVED), RESIDENT OF CHEEPATIVARIPALLI, MALLECHERUVU, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶72

...PETITIONER

¶73

AND

¶74

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME (HOME GUARDS), SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI.

¶75

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶76

THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, HOME GUARDS, ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶77

6

¶78

THE COMMANDANT, 0/0 THE COMMANDANT OF HOME GUARDS, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

¶79

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶80

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶81

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 toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 5th respondent in removing the petitioner vide his Proceedings D.O.No.12/2018 (B7/HGs/1722/ 14/2016), dated 31-01-2018 from the rolls of Home Guards Organization for his unauthorized absent for three months from 01-12-2015 in contrary to Rule 7 (3) (4) and (5) of the Madras Home Guards Rules is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and also violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service and pass

¶82

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶83

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 reinstate the petitioner into service as Home Guard by duly suspending the orders in D.O.No.12/2018 (137/HGs/1722/ 14/2016), dated 31-01-2018 of the 5th respondent, pending disposal of this writ petition and pass

¶84

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶85

1.VUTUPALLI RAJANNA

¶86

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶87

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶88

WRIT PETITION NO: 12935/2021

¶89

Between:

¶90

B. BALAKOTI NAIK, S/O MANGYA NAIK AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC - EX-HOME GUARD NO 330, HOME GUARD UNIT, R/O AS RAMARAO HOUSE, BANDAR ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH..

7

...PETITIONER

AND

THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶95

THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE HOME GUARDS, GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶96

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT..

¶97

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶98

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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS by declaring the action of the respondent authorities in issuing impugned removal order in C. No. 5060/H1/2019 D.O. No. 11/2020 dated 27.02.2020, issued by the.3rd respondent removing the petitioner from the service of the Home Guards as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Art 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to Principles of Natural Justice, apart from violative of Rule 7 (4) of the A.P. Home Guards Rules and the same is liable to be set aside, and consequently set aside the impugned removal order in C. No. 5060/H1/2019 D.O. No. 11/2020 dated 27.02.2020, issued by the 3rd respondent duly re-enrolling the petitioner as Home Guard at the earliest

¶99

IA NO: 1 OF 2021

¶100

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 impugned removal order in C. No. 5060/H1/2019 D.O. No. 11/2020 dated 27.02.2020, issued by the 3rd respondent duly re-enrolling the petitioner as Home Guard at the earliest

¶101

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶102

1.K SRINIVASA PRASAD

¶103

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶104

8

¶105

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶106

WRIT PETITION NO: 24050/2022

¶107

Between:

¶108

KESAVARAPU CHANDRA SEKHAR, ,(HG.682) S/O SANYASIRAO, AGED 46 YEARS, OCC. HOME GUARD (REMOVED), R/O.D.NO.9176/1, THOTASTREET, HIGH SCHOOL ROAD. PRATHIPADU, KAKINADA DISTRICT.

¶109

KUNIKESAVA,(HG.531), S/O SESHACLRI, AGED 36 YEARS, OCC. HOME GUARD (REMOVED), R/O.D.NO.7-57/A, JANARDHAN COLONY,VIDYA NAGAR, S.V. POST, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT.

¶110

B.SAHAYAM., (HG.1229) S/O BALAYYA, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC. HOME GUARD (REMOVED), R/O.D.NO.1-8A, VELUR,PICHATURMANDAL, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT.

¶111

MURARIROSAIAH,, (HG.479) S/O BODCBBA, AGED 44 YEARS, OCC. HOME GUARD (REMOVED), R/O.D.NO.13, GOLLAPALLI VILLAGE,197RAMAPURAM POST GUDIPALAMMANDAL,CHITOOR DISTRICT.

¶112

B.CHITTIBABU,, (HG.1098) SIC) BABU, AGED 38 YEARS. OCC. HOME GUARD (REMOVED), R/O.D.NO.18-15, KATTAKINDHAPALLI, G.D.NELLOREMANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶113

A. SURESHBABU,, (HG.549) S/O APPARAO, AGED 36 YEARS, OCC. HOME GUARD (REMOVED), R/O.D.NO.1-128, PEDDASTREET, JALLAPALLI VILLAGE, NARSIPRAM POST NANDIGAMMANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶114

YATAMVENKATESH,, (HG.861) S/O MUNISWAMY, AGED 44 YEARS, OCC. HOME GUARD (REMOVED), R/O.FLAT NO.87,D.NO.55-3-3 AVSN COLONY, PALAKOLLU VILLAGE AND MANDRIL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶115

VELUGUBANTIBHASKAR, (HG.716) S/O NAGARAJU, AGED 39 YEARS, OCC. HOME GUARD (REMOVED), R/O.H.NO. 4-48, VEGAVARAM POST, JANGAREDDYGUDEMMANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT. PETITIONER NO.8 WITHDRAWN AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED 06.05.2025 IN WP 24050/22 IN THE PETITION

9

...PETITIONER(S)

AFFIDAVIT.

AND

THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶121

THE ADDL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, HOME GUARDS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶122

THE COMMANDANT OF HOME GUARDS, VISHAKHAPATNAM, VISHAKA DISTRICT.

¶123

THE COMMANDANT OF HOME GUARDS, KARNOOL, KARNOOL DISTRICT.

¶124

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT.

¶125

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, URBAN POLICE,TIRUPATHI DISTRICT.

¶126

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR, CHITOOR DISTRICT.

¶127

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶128

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ELURU, ELLIN' DISTRICT.

¶129

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BHIMAVARAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶130

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶131

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 toto issue a writ or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the proceedings, 1) D.O.No.17/2017, C.No.6324/H1/2017, dated 06.07.2017, 2) D.O.No.4/2012,RC.No.B7/HGs/442/1/2012 dated 03.02.2012 3. D.O.No.6/2010, B7/HGs/7/2010, dated 08.02.2010, 4) D.O.No.34/2009, C.No.B7/HG/79/2009, dated 20.10.2009, 5) D.O.No.02/2013,

¶132

10

¶133

C.No.B3/26/I814/13, dated 29.08.2013, 6) D.O.No.16/2010, R.No.B7/HGs/42/10, dated 05.05.2010,7) C.No.9188/H1/2009, dated Nil/12/2009, 8)D.O.No.35/2014, C.No.445/H1/2014 dated 05.11.2014, on the file of the respective respondents, in removing the petitioners from service as Home Guards as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, incompetent, against the principles of natural justice and accordingly set aside the same and consequently direct the respective respondents to reinstate the petitioners into service as Home Guards and to pass

¶134

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶135

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 suspend the impugned proceedings, 1) D.O.No.17/2017. C.No.6324/H1/2017, dated 06.07.2017, 2) D.O.No.4/2012,RC.No.B7/HGs/442/1/2012, dated 03.02.2012, 3) D.O.No.6/2010, B7/1-1Gs/7/2010, dated 08.02.2010, 4) D.O.No .34/2009. C.No.B7/HG/79/2009, dated 20.10.2009, 5) D.O.No.02/2013, C.No.B3/26/1814/13, dated 29.08.2013, 6) D.O.No.16/2010, R.No.B7/HGs/42/10, dated 05.05.2010,7) C.No.9188/H1/2009, dated Nil/12/2009, 8)D.O.No.35/2014, C.No.445/H1/2014 dated 05.11.2014, on the file of the respective respondents, by directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioners into service as Home Guards and to pass

¶136

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶137

1.K SRINIVASA PRASAD

¶138

2.K V SESHAGIRI RAO

¶139

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶140

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶141

WRIT PETITION NO: 30798/2022

¶142

Between:

¶143

VELPURIKOTIVEERAIH, ,(HG.356) SIO VENKATSWARLLU, AGED 31 YEARS, OCCHOME GUARD (REMOVED), R/O, CHINA KONDRUPADU VILLAGE, PRATHIPADU MANDAL, GUNTURDISTRICT

...PETITIONER

AND

11

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶148

THE ADDL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, HOME GUARDS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶149

THE COMMANDANT OF HOME GUARDS, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶150

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE URBAN, GUNTUR,GUNTURDISTRICT.

¶151

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶152

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 or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the proceedings, D.O.No.175/2018, C.No.8962/H1/2017-18 dated 27.03.2018, on the file of the 4th respondent, in removing the petitioner from service as Home Guard as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, incompetent, against the principles of natural justice and accordingly set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service as Home Guard and to pass

¶153

IA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶154

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 impugned proceedings, D.O.No.175/2018, C.No.8962/H1/2017-18, dated 27.03.2018, on the file of the 4th respondents, by directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service as Home Guard and to pass

¶155

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶156

1.K SRINIVASA PRASAD

¶157

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶158

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶159

The Court made the following:

¶160

12

¶161

COMMON ORDER:

¶162

Heard K. Srinivasa Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner(s) and learned Government Pleader for Services-I appearing for the respondent(s).

¶163

The Writ Petitions are filed against the proceedings of the respondents in removing the petitioner(s) from service, who were working as ‘Home guards’ in the respondent department, without conducting an enquiry.

¶164

Both the learned counsel submit that the issue involved in these

¶165

cases is covered by the decision of Division Bench of this Court in W.P. Nos.23101 of 2021 & batch, dated 15.07.2025, and requests that the same order may be passed in these Writ Petitions.

¶166

Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of the orders passed by this Court in W.P. Nos.23101 of 2021 and batch, dated 15.07.2025. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶167