B Lakshmi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

B LAKSHMI, D/O.BALAKOTI, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC PROHIBITION EXCISE SUB-INSPECTOR, PROHIBITION EXCISE STATION, TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE (EXCISE) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT -522238

¶13

THE COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION EXCISE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522503

¶14

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION EXCISE, KAKINADA DIVISION, KAKINADA DISTRICT 533001

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court

¶17

2

¶18

may be pleased topleased to issue an appropriate order or directions more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Prohibition Excise Inspector under ST category to meet the adequacy of 6 posts out of 98 posts of cadre strength of Prohibition Excise Inspectors in Zone II is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as Prohibition Excise Inspector in the ensuing promotions against the ST category under 6percent quota to meet the adequacy, and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶19

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶20

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 respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated 21-05- 2026 made by the petitioner for promotion to the post of Prohibition & Excise Inspector in Zone II in the ensuing promotions against the ST category under 6% quota to meet the adequacy, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶22

1.KAVITHA GOTTIPATI

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶24

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶25

The Court made the following:

¶26

3

¶27

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.17341 of 2026

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in not considering the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Prohibition and Excise Inspector under S.T category, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶31

The Petitioner belongs to Schedule Tribe (for short, ‘S.T’) category and was appointed as Junior Assistant in the year 2009 under S.C/S.T backlog vacancies in Krishna district. Subsequently, the Petitioner was promoted as Prohibition and Excise Sub-Inspector on 03.08.2013. As the Petitioner belongs to S.T category, she claims for promotion against the 6% reservation earmarked for the S.T. category under Rule No.22 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 (for short, ‘the rules’) and a representation was given by the Petitioner on 21.05.2026 requesting consideration for promotion under the said reservation. As the representation given by the Petitioner is not being considered, the present Writ Petition came to be filed.

¶32

4

¶33