B.V. Pushpavathi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Nov 2025WP/9309/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.No.9309 of 2023; AP High Court Amaravati; Nyapathy Vijay J; 17.11.2025; compassionate appointment denied; widow of Late R.G. Ramesh; B.C. Welfare Department; Sri Sathya Sai District; G.O.Ms.No.612 dated 30.10.1991; representation Dt.15.09.2021; Articles 14, 16, 19, 226; Section 151 CPC; withdrawal letter dated 13.11.2025; dismissed as withdrawn; liberty to pursue remedies; no costs; miscellaneous petitions dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal as withdrawn upon the petitioner's own request; permission to withdraw accorded; liberty granted to pursue legal remedies as and when occasion arises; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions (if any) stood dismissed as a sequel. No substantive relief on the compassionate-appointment claim was granted or refused. ¶38-40

B.V. Pushpavathi, Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶38-40

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents' failure to provide compassionate appointment to the petitioner in place of her deceased husband R.G. Ramesh, despite her claimed eligibility, was arbitrary and illegal as being contrary to G.O.Ms.No.612 dated 30.10.1991 and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 19 of the Constitution, warranting a mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds. (Derived from the prayer; the Court did not adjudicate this issue.)

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Permission sought by the petitioner's counsel to withdraw the writ petition is accorded, and the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to pursue the legal remedies as and when occasion arises, and with no order as to costs.

¶38-40

Key takeaways

As a sequel to the dismissal, the miscellaneous petitions (interim applications, if any) shall stand dismissed.ratio¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), W.P.No.9309 of 2023 (Nyapathy Vijay, J.), decided 17.11.2025. The petitioner, B.V. Pushpavathi, widow of Late R.G. Ramesh, had sought a mandamus declaring arbitrary the respondents' failure to grant her compassionate appointment in place of her deceased husband, allegedly contrary to G.O.Ms.No.612 dated 30.10.1991 and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 19, with a consequential direction to respondent 2 to appoint her on compassionate grounds; interim applications under Section 151 CPC (including a request to implead additional respondents 7 and 8) were also on record. Before any adjudication, the petitioner's counsel filed a letter dated 13.11.2025 seeking permission to withdraw. The Court accorded permission, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with liberty to pursue legal remedies as and when occasion arises, directed no costs, and dismissed the incidental miscellaneous petitions as a sequel. No finding was made on the merits of the compassionate-appointment claim.

¶1

APHC010182302023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3460]

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

MONDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 9309/2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

B.V. PUSHPAVATHI,, W/O. LATE R.G. RAMESH, AGED 47 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.6-238, ROLLA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., B.C. WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AT VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT, SRI SATHYA SAI.

¶14

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, B.C. WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SRI SATHYA SAI.

¶15

THE ASST B C WELFARE OFFICER, PENUKONDA, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT.

¶16

THE TAHSILDAR, AGALI MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT.

¶17

THE TAHSILDAR, ROLLA MANDAL, SRI SATHYA SAI DISTRICT.

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

¶20

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 appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly in the nature of a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not providing the compassionate appointment to the petitioner in the place of petitioner's deceased husband namely R.G. Ramesh despite the petitioner being eligible as wholly arbitrary, illegal contrary to G.O.Ms.No.612 dated 30.10.1991 issued by the 1st Respondent besides being violative of petitioner Rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 16 and 19 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to appoint the petitioner on compassionate grounds and pass

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶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 direct the 2nd respondent to consider petitioner's representation Dt.15.09.2021 for compassionate appointment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.612 dated 30.10.1991 forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass

¶23

IA NO: 2 OF 2023

¶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 pleased to permit the implead petitioners to be impleaded as party - respondents 7 & 8 to the main Writ Petition No. 9309 of 2023 in the interest of justice and pass

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶26

1.KATA SAMBASIVA RAO

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶28

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶29