Pothala Ramesh Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

POTHALA RAMESH, S/O.P. RAMA MOHANA RAO, AGED 50 YEARS, OCC FOREST BEAT OFFICER, RUGADA BEAT, POTHALAPATNAM 0PP. APHB COLONY, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT-532001.

¶11

SINGAPARAPU RAMA RAO,, S/O. LATE SRI SURYANARAYANA AGED 57 YEARS, OCC ASSISTANT BEAT OFFICER, KALINGAPATNAM BEAT, R/O. D.NO.2-1-9/A, CHITTI VEEDI BONDILIPURAM RD., BALAGA METTU, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT532001.

¶12

AMERAPU BABU RAO,, S/O.LATE SRI RAJALINGAM, AGED 43 YEARS, OCC ASSISTANT BEAT OFFCER, VATSAVALASA BEAT, R/O. 3-83, CHILAKAPALEM (VILL) ETCHERDA (MO, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT-532410.

¶13

DIVILI SREENIVASA RAO,, S/O.LATE SRI APPA RAO AGED 58 YEARS, OCC ASSISTANT BEAT OFFICER, SUDIRAI KANDA BEAT, R/O. MAKIVALASA VILLAGE AND POST NARASAMAPETA (M), SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT-532421.

¶14

CHOWDARI SRINIVAS,, S/O. SRI KALI PRASADA RAO AGED 49 YEARS, OCC ASSISTANT BEAT OFFICER KOTAPLEM BEAT, SRIKAKULAM RANGE, R/O. CHINNA VEEDHI, BYRISINGAPURAM (VILL AND PO) SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT-532185

¶15

K. LAKSHMANA RAO,, S/O.LATE SRI GANNAYYA, AGED 56 YEARS, ABO, S. MATCHILESAM BEAT, SRIKAKULA RANGE, R/O. D.NO.3-26, RYTHU BAZAAR, LLLISIPURAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT

¶16

DR,J

¶17

W.P.No.1110 of 2026

¶18

CH. RAMESH BABU,, S/O.SRI SATYANARAYANA AGED 48 YEARS, OCC ABO, SARIAPALLI BEAT, TKL RANGE, R/O. D.NO.14-9-92/1, NEAR JATLASWARA SWAMY TEMPLE, OLD SRIKAKULAM SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT-532001

¶19

CH.SIVA PRASADA RAO,, S/O APPARAO, AGED 51 YRS, AGED 51 YRS, ASST BEAT OFFICER,KUPPILI BEAT, SRIKAKULAM RANGE,. DOOR NO 7-7-14, BALIJIPALLIVARI ST, SRIKAKULAM.532001.

¶20

S.SANKARARAO,, S/O SURIAPPALA NAIDU, AGED 56 YRS. OFFICE SUBORDINATE,OFFICE OF FRO, PALAKONDA RANGE, RESIDENTOF NAKKALAPETA, NEAR SAIBABA TEMPLE, PARVATHIPURAM DIST.

¶21

...PETITIONER(S)

¶22

AND

¶23

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENVIRONMENT, FORESTS, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (SEC.V) DEPARTMENT,A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522241

¶24

THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, GUNTUR.522002

¶25

THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.532001

¶26

THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.532001

¶27

THE CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.530001

¶28

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶29

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 any writ or direction particularly one in the nature of MANDAMUS declaring the inaction on the part of the Respondents in regularizing the Petitioners in the positions in which they are working as shown in the cause title, in terms of Act No.30 of 2023 and G.O.Ms.No.114, Dt.21.10.2023 Finance (HR-I Pig. and Policy) Department and various decisions of the Supreme court as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct them to regularize them with effect from the date of their

¶30

DR,J

¶31

W.P.No.1110 of 2026

¶32

appointment with all consequential benefits and to count the period of their service prior to regularization, for pension and retirement benefits and pass

¶33

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶34

1.A V S LAXMI

¶35

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶36

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶37

DR,J W.P.No.1110 of 2026

¶38

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶39

The present Writ Petition is filed declaring the action of the Respondents in not regularizing the services of the Petitioners as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct Respondents to regularize Petitioners with effect from the date of their appointment with all consequential benefits.

¶40

In the instant case, all the Petitioners were joined as Forest Beat Officer, Assistant Forest Beat Officer and Office Subordinate in the Respondent Department earlier to 24.11.1993 and the Petitioners had completed more than 30 years of service in the Respondent-Department. While so, Respondent No.1 had issued G.O.Ms.No.114, Finance (HR-I Plg. & Policy) Department dated 21.10.2023 based on the Andhra Pradesh Regularization of Services of Contract Employees Act, 2023 (for short, ‘Act 30 of 2023’) proposing to regularize the services of the contract employees vis-àvis the clear vacancies existing as of 02.06.2014, whereunder regularization of individuals appointed on a contract basis was to be considered provided that the final appointment was in due compliance with the procedure relating to (i) Notification of Vacancies; (ii) Selection Process; and (iii) Rule of Reservation and eligibility; age; and Educational Qualifications prescribed for the post. The Petitioners claim for regularization in terms of the ‘Act 30 of 2023’. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed.

¶41

Heard Smt. A.V.S.Laxmi, learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents.

¶42

DR,J W.P.No.1110 of 2026

¶43

The learned counsel for the Petitioners relies upon Order dated 07.04.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.8827 of 2024 and batch in support of her contentions, wherein similarly placed employees were directed to be considered for regularization.

¶44

The learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the cases of the Petitioners for regularization would be considered in terms of Act 30 of 2023 as per their turn and therefore he contends that the present Writ Petition is premature.

¶45

Having heard the respective counsel and considering the Order of this Court in W.P.No.8827 of 2024 dated 07.04.2025, the present Writ Petition is disposed of with the following direction;

¶46

The Respondent-authorities are directed to consider the case of the Petitioners for regularization in terms of the Act 30 of 2023 on par with other contract employees as expeditiously as possible. No order as to costs.

¶47

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶48

_______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶49

Date: 19.01.2026 Dvs

¶50

DR,J W.P.No.1110 of 2026

¶51

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶52

36