Dismissed¶38

Yepuganti Venkata Padmanabham v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC8 Jul 2026WP/1355/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, Amaravati (Balaji Medamalli, J.), W.P. No. 1355 of 2023, decided 09.07.2026: teacher's transfer/proceedings challenge (RC.No.6/B3/2022 dated 18.01.2023, Konaseema/East Godavari school education authorities) dismissed as infructuous after respondents cancelled the proceedings following the interim status quo order dated 24.01.2023; no costs; IA under Section 151 CPC closed; issues under Article 226 and Article 16 not adjudicated on merits.

What did the court decide?

In view of the interim status quo order dated 24.01.2023 and the subsequent cancellation of the impugned proceedings by the respondents, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed. ¶38

Yepuganti Venkata Padmanabham Vs the State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

[3573]

¶2

Date of reserved for orders :

¶3

Date of pronouncement :09.07.2026 Date of uploading :09.07.2026

¶4

APHC010027532023

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶6

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶7

THURSDAY, THE 9^th DAY OF JULY 2026

¶8

PRESENT

¶9

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO: 1355/2023

¶11

Between:

¶12

YEPUGANTI VENKATA PADMANABHAM, S/O CHINTANNU AGE 50 YEARS, OCC- SECOND GRADE TEACHER DOOR.NO 7.94, RAMALAYAM CENTER RAMARAJULANKA, MALIKIPURAM MANDAL DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT PIN - 533249

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

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

¶16

THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, A.P ANJANEYA TOWERS, IBRAHIMPATNAM VIJAYAWADA (NTR) DISTRICT,

¶17

THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT

¶18

THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

¶19

THE MANDAL EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, SAKHINETIPALLI, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR KONASEEMA DISTRICT

¶20

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶21

¶22

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 appropriate write, or order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th and 5th responders in issued the Proceeding RC.No.6/B3/2022 date 18-01 2023 as illegal, arbitrary, irregular, unjust and contrary to the procedure established by law, contrary to the ruies of the Andhra Pradesh Teachers ( General Promotions and regulation of transfers) Rules issued vide apart from being volative Article 16 of the Constitution of India and set aside the Proceeding issued by the 4th and 5th Respondents RC.No.6/33/2022 date 18-01-2023 and same in the interest of justice and to pass such

¶23

IA NO: 1 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 may be pleased to Directed the respondents to continue the petitioners here in respective schools without transfers in present places of posting held by petitioners and stay all the Proceeding issued by the 4th and 5th Respondents in the RC.No.6/B3/2022 date 18-01-2023 pending disposal of the above write petition in the interest of justice and pass such

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶26

1.CH S V SURAJ

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶28

1.GP FOR SERVICES III

¶29

The Court made the following:

¶30

¶31

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI

¶32

WRIT PETITION NO: 1355/2023

¶33

ORDER

¶34

The Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the proceedings in RC.No.6/B3/2022 date 18.01.2023 issued by the Respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶35

Mr. Ch. S. V. Suraj, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that this Court, vide order dated 24.01.2023, passed interim orders directing to maintain the status quo as on that day. Thereafter, the proceedings were cancelled by the respondents.

¶36