Disposed¶27

K L Narsappa v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Mar 2025WP/1545/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati; WP 1545 of 2019; Art. 226 mandamus; BC-A to BC-B category conversion; Mini Anganwadi Worker post; Nallannapally Village, Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District; representation dated 04.02.2019 not considered; reservation percentage/roster unit dispute; disposed with direction to consider representation per governing rules and law; no costs; Dr Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa; 10.03.2025.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent authorities to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 04.02.2019 and pass appropriate orders according to governing rules and law; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications, if any, in the writ petition stand closed. ¶27

K L Narsappa Vs the State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondents 3 and 4 in not considering the petitioner's representation dated 04.02.2019 for change of category from BC-A to BC-B for the post of Mini Anganwadi Worker (Nallannapally Village, Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District) is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice, and whether they should be directed to consider it. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

This Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the respondent authorities to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 04.02.2019 and pass appropriate orders according to governing rules and law; with no order as to costs, and pending interlocutory applications, if any, standing closed.

¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 1545 of 2019 (under Article 226 of the Constitution of India), High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, decided 10.03.2025 by Dr Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa (single judge). The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus declaring illegal and arbitrary the failure of respondents 3 and 4 to consider his representation dated 04.02.2019 for change of category from BC-A to BC-B for the post of Mini Anganwadi Worker, Nallannapally Village, Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District. Counsel for the petitioner contended the notified reservation percentage had not been followed and that BC-A candidates were unavailable in the division/unit; the respondents' counter asserted BC-A persons were available. Without deciding the reservation question on merits, the Court disposed of the petition, directing the respondent authorities to dispose of the representation dated 04.02.2019 and pass appropriate orders according to governing rules and law, with no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications stood closed.

¶1

APHC010033312019

¶2

[3396]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

MOND A Y ,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 1545 OF 2019

¶8

Between:

¶9

K L Narsappa ...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of A.P and Ot h ers ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶12

1.K SRINIVAS

¶13

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶14

1.GP FOR REVENU E (AP)

¶15

2.GP FOR WOMEN D EV CHILD WELFARE(AP)

¶16

The Court made the following:

¶17

ORDER:-

¶18

The instant Writ P e tition is filed under Article 226 of th e Constitution of

¶19

India for the following relief:

¶20

“to issue a W r it of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3^rd and 4^th respondents in not c onsidering the representation of the petit i oner dated 04.02.2019 for chan g e of category from BC-A to BC-B for the p ost of Mini Anganwadi Wroker i n respect of Nallannapally Village, Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District, i llegal, arbitrary and violation of principle s of natural

¶21

justice and consequently direct the respondent No.3 and 4 to consider the representation dt 04.02.2019 and pass such other orders”.

¶22

Heard Sri K. Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶23

Assistant Government Pleader for Child Development and Family Welfare for the respondents.

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondents have not followed the percentage of reservation implemented in the Notification issued for the post of Mini Anganwadi Worker by allotting category BC-A woman. Learned counsel would further submit that BC-A category men or women are not available in the division, which is a Unit as per roster of reservation system. A representation dated 04.02.2019 has submitted by the petitioner to convert BC-A category to BC-B category for the post of Mini Anganwadi Worker, but the respondents 3 and 4 have not considered the representation and it is still pending.

¶25

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Child Development and Family Welfare for the respondents would submit that the counter would show that BC-A people are available in the division. Hence, question of convertion of BC-A to BC-B does not arise.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Writ Petition may be disposed of by giving a direction to the respondents to consider the representation, according to law.

¶27

Considering the submissions made, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the respondent authorities are directed to dispose of the representation dated 04.02.2019 submitted by the petitioner and pass

¶28

appropriate orders, according to governing rules and law. There shall be no

¶29

order as to costs.

¶30