Disposed¶29

Dr. PuttaKalavathi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC27 Jan 2026WP/15060/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP High Court Amaravati; W.P. No.15060/2024; Justice D Ramesh; writ of Mandamus under Article 226; seniority-based promotion dispute; Joint Director, Collegiate Education; Rule 4(1) AP Collegiate Education Service Special Rules; G.O.Ms.No.47 dated 14.05.2007; Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21; disposal by consideration of petitioner's representation; Government Pleader concession; no order as to costs; merits left open; no case citations.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondents, particularly respondent No.1, to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed. ¶29

Dr. PuttaKalavathi, Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the promotion of respondent No.4 to the post of Joint Director, Collegiate Education, effected by respondent No.2 in preference to the petitioner (senior-most employee), in derogation of Rule 4(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Collegiate Education Service Special Rules (G.O.Ms.No.47, dated 14.05.2007), was unjust, arbitrary, illegal and violative of the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India, warranting a writ of Mandamus directing consideration of the petitioner for the post and setting aside of the unofficial respondent's promotion.

¶26

Court's answer

Without entering into the merits, and on the joint submissions of both learned counsel, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition directing the respondents, more particularly the 1st respondent, to consider the representation made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; there shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Single Judge (Justice D Ramesh) disposal under Article 226: Dr. Puttakalavathi, Principal (Kurnool), had challenged the action of respondent No.2 (Commissioner, Collegiate Education) in promoting respondent No.4 (Dr Ch Krishna) to the post of Joint Director, Collegiate Education, in her place despite her seniority, alleging derogation of Rule 4(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Collegiate Education Service Special Rules issued vide G.O.Ms.No.47, dated 14.05.2007, and violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution. With pleadings complete, the petitioner's counsel sought disposal by consideration of her representation (dated 15.03.2024 per para 27; 16.03.2024 per prayer), and the Learned Government Pleader conceded. The Court disposed of the Writ Petition directing respondent No.1 to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law; no order as to costs; miscellaneous applications closed. Merits were not adjudicated and no precedents were engaged.

¶1

[3208]

¶2

APHC010297822024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 15060/2024

¶9

Between:

¶10

DR. PUTTAKALAVATHI,, W/O. AVVARI VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS. OCC PRINCIPAL, R/O. C/D-13, C CAMP, KURNOOL, KNI CAMP-B-KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH-518002

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION. A.P. SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE COMMISSIONER, , COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶15

THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR FAC, ZONE-IV, KADAPA. YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶16

DR CH KRISHNA, PRINCIPAL GOVERNMENT DEGREE COLLEGE AT KAKINADA PRESENTLY POSTED AS JOINT DIRECTOR, O/O COMMISSIONER OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, ANDHRA PRADESH AT MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶19

1.JADA SRAVAN KUMAR

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶21

1.GP FOR SERVICES III

¶22

2.N BHARAT BABU

¶23

¶24

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶25

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer:

¶26

“ may be pleased to issue a Writ Order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in effecting the promotion to the unofficial respondent to the post of Joint Director collegiate Education Instead of petitioner despite the petitioner being the senior most employee in derogation of Rule 4(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Collegiate Education Service Special Rules issued vide G.O.Ms.No.47, dated 14.05.2007 issued by the respondent No.1 herein as unjust arbitrary illegal and being in violation of the Fundamental Rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent no 1 to consider the candidature of the petitioner to the post of Joint Director in strict compliance of the Rule 4(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Collegiate Education Service Special Rules issued vide G OMs No 47 dated 14.05.2007 considering the representation dated 16.03.2024 duly setting aside the promotion of unofficial respondent and pass”.

¶27

Though pleadings have been completed, now, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without going into the merits of the case, the writ petition may be disposed of by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 15.03.2024.

¶28

Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents has conceded to the above submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶29

Considering the submission made by both the learned counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents, more particularly, 1^st respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶30

¶31

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶32

closed.

¶33

__________________

¶34

JUSTICE D.RAMESH

¶35

Date:28.01.2026 KNN

¶36