Dismissed¶36

E.Srinivasa Reddy, v. The State of A.P.

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Jul 2025WP/3239/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

E. Srinivasa Reddy v. The State of A.P. and others; Writ Petition No. 3239 of 2018; High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; decided 02.07.2025; Dr. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa; APEWIDC; Executive Engineer Full Additional Charge; Deputy Executive Engineer; Guntur Division; Ongole; Lanka Ananda Rao; writ of mandamus; Article 226 Constitution of India; Section 151 CPC; status quo; Managing Director; Minister for Human Resources Development; relief infructuous; dismissed; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

Recording the submission that the relief had become infructuous, the Writ Petition is dismissed, with no order as to costs. ¶36

E.Srinivasa Reddy, Vs The State of A.P. — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the Managing Director of the 2nd respondent Corporation could pass orders keeping the 3rd respondent as Executive Engineer (Full Additional Charge) at Guntur Division, in which post the petitioner was functioning as full Additional Charge Executive Engineer, on the premise that one temporary/incharge/full additional charge officer cannot be replaced by another temporary/incharge/full additional charge officer.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

Recording the submission that the relief had become infructuous, the Writ Petition is dismissed, with no order as to costs.

¶36

Key takeaways

As a sequel to the dismissal, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.No.3239 of 2018 (High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; Dr. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa; decided 02.07.2025): Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by E. Srinivasa Reddy, Executive Engineer (FAC)/Deputy Executive Engineer (I/C), APEWIDC, Guntur, sought a writ of mandamus directing the Managing Director of the 2nd respondent Corporation (APEWIDC) not to pass orders keeping the 3rd respondent, Lanka Ananda Rao, Deputy Executive Engineer, as Executive Engineer (Full Additional Charge) at Guntur Division - the post on which the petitioner was functioning as full Additional Charge Executive Engineer - on the basis that one temporary/incharge/full additional charge officer cannot be replaced by another such officer; IA No. 1 of 2018 under Section 151 CPC sought maintenance of status quo till posting of a regular Executive Engineer. When taken up for hearing, counsel for the petitioner stated that the relief had become infructuous and sought mere disposal. Accordingly, the Writ Petition was dismissed as infructuous with no order as to costs, and miscellaneous petitions, if any, were directed to stand closed. No substantive issue was adjudicated and no precedent was cited or considered.

¶1

[3396]

¶2

APHC010073452018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 3239/2018

¶8

Between:

¶9

E.SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O E.SOMI REDDY, AGED 53 YEARS, EXECUTIUVE ENGINEER FAC, (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER I/C), ANDHRA PRADESH EDUCATION AND WELFARE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPOMENT CORPORATION (APEWIDC) GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF A P, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECONDARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

THE ANDHRA PRADESH EDUCATION AND WELFARE INFRASTRUCTURE, DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (APEWIDC), REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL ROAD, BESIDES SAIRAM THEATRE,CHITTI NAGAR,VIJAYAWADA1, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶14

LANKA ANANDA RAO, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ANDHRA PRADESH EDUCATION AND WELFARE INFRASTRUCTURE, DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (APEWIDC), ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT.

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

¶17

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 an order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to the Managing Director 2nd respondent Corporation not to pass any orders keeping the 3rd respondent as Executive Engineer,Full Additional Charge at Guntur Division in which post the Petitioner is functioning as full Additional Charge Executive Engineer as per the directions of Managing Director, 2nd respondent Corporation basing on the letter addressed by the Additional Private Secretary to Honble Minister for Human Resources Development, Government of Andhra Pradesh as one temporary/incharge/ full additional charge officer cannot be replaced by another temporary/incharge/full additional charge Officer and pass

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶19

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 2nd Respondent Corporation rep. by its Managing Director to maintain status quo of the Petitioner as Executive Engineer (FAC) till a regular Executive Engineer was posted at Guntur Division and to pass

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.Y V SATYANARAYANA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶23

1.G SEENA KUMAR (SC FOR APEWIDC AND RVM SSA

¶24

2.GP FOR EDUCATION (AP)

¶25

The Court made the following:

¶26

¶27

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶28

WRIT PETITION NO: 3239/2018

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with

¶31

the following prayer for:

¶32

“…to issue an order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to the Managing Director 2nd respondent Corporation not to pass any orders keeping the 3rd respondent as Executive Engineer, Full Additional Charge at Guntur Division in which post the Petitioner is functioning as full Additional Charge Executive Engineer as per the directions of Managing Director, 2nd respondent Corporation basing on the letter addressed by the Additional Private Secretary to Hon’ble Minister for Human Resources Development, Government of Andhra Pradesh as one temporary/incharge/full additional charge officer cannot be replaced by another temporary/incharge/full additional charge Officer and pass…”

¶33

When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri Y.V. Satyanarayana,

¶34

learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the petition may be disposed of, no further orders are required in this matter, since the relief has become infructuous.

¶35