Dismissed¶35

K v. M Subramanyam v the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Aug 2025WP/2374/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compassionate appointment; G.O.Ms No. 10 dated 25-01-2018; representation dated 14-03-2018; Articles 14, 16 and 226 Constitution of India; Section 151 CPC; IA No. 1 of 2019; dismissal for non-prosecution; no representation; no order as to costs; Andhra Pradesh School Education Department; Commissioner of School Education; District Collector and District Educational Officer Krishna; Head Master SKHUP School RTC Colony Machilipatnam; single-judge bench B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution, there being no representation for the petitioner on the date of hearing despite the earlier direction dated 15.07.2025 to list the matter under the caption 'For Dismissal'; no order as to costs. ¶35

K v M Subramanyam Vs the State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

APHC010051792019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3368]

¶5

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 2374/2019

¶9

Between:

¶10

K V M SUBRAMANYAM, S/O. LATE VEERACHANDRAAO R/O. 20-268NEAR ANANDPET MACHILIPATNAM KRISHNADIST

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SECRETARUAT AMARAVATHI VELAGAPUDI GUNTURU DIST

¶14

THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, EBRAHIMPATNAM VIJAYAWADA KRISHNA DIST

¶15

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MICHILIPATNAM KRISHNA DIST

¶16

THE DIST EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KRISHNA MICHILIPATNAM

¶17

THE HEAD MASTER, SKHUP SCHOOL RTC COLONY MICHILIPATNAM KRISHNA DIST

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

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 or direction

¶20

¶21

more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the Petitioner for compassionate appointment any suitable post in the existing vacancies as per G OMS No. 10 dt 25-01-2018 as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Article 14 and 16 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner on compassionate grounds to consider the case of the petitioner on compassionate grounds any suitable post in the existing vacancies by considering the petitioner representation dt14-03-2018 and pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶23

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 the case of the petitioner on ;compassionate grounds any suitable post in the existing vacancies by considering the petitioner representation dated 14-3-2018 pending disposal of W.P

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶25

1. VENKATESWERLLU KESAMSETTY

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶27

1.GP FOR REVENUE (AP)

¶28

¶29

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

¶30