Gunti Sampoorna Rao Vs the State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Gunti Sampoorna Rao Vs the State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, engaged on out-sourcing basis as Attenders and Process Servers in courts in Visakhapatnam District and appointed through a selection process conducted in 2007 & 2008, are entitled to regularization/absorption of their services with effect from the date of initial appointment along with consequential benefits. +1 more

Court's answer

Following this Court's Judgment dated 10.12.2025 in W.P.No.22390 of 2024 & batch, which held that regularization of such outsourced engagements is not permissible, the writ petition seeking regularization of the petitioners' services is dismissed, with no order as to costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 17636 of 2024, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), order dated 10.02.2026, per R. Raghunandan Rao, J. (bench incl. T.C.D. Sekhar, J.) — Seventeen persons engaged on out-sourcing basis as Attenders and Process Servers in various courts in Visakhapatnam District, contending they were selected and appointed through a selection process conducted in 2007 & 2008, sought regularization/absorption of their services from the date of initial appointment with consequential benefits, challenging as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 the proceedings Roc. No. 280/E1/2022 dated 03-02-2023 (attributed in the writ prayer to the Registrar (Administration) and in the judgment body to the Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam) rejecting their representation dated 02-09-2022; an interim application (IA No.1 of 2024, Section 151 CPC) sought Minimum Time Scale invoking State of Punjab and Others Vs Jagjit Singh and Others dated 26-10-2016. Noting that identical issues had been decided in W.P.No.22390 of 2024 & batch on 10.12.2025, where this Court held such regularization is not permissible, the Court, following that Judgment, DISMISSED the writ petition; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stood closed as a sequel.

[3529]

APHC010343152024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION NO: 17636/2024

Between:

GUNTI SAMPOORNA RAO, S/O.G.SHYAM BABU, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS. OCC.. ATTENDER, SC/ST COURT. VISAKHAPATNAM, R/O.D.NO.17-72, VIJAYA DURGA COLONY, HANUMANTHAWAKA. VISAKHAPATNAM 530 040.

KANDIVALASA SANTOSH, S/O.K.RAMU, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS. OCC.. ATTENDER, ADDITIONAL FAMILY COURT, VISAKHAPATNAM, R/O.DOOR NO.49-2-44/1. RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR, AKKAYYAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM.

MAMIDI LEELADHAR, S/O.LATE M.SATYAM, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC.. PROCESS SERVER, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PADERU, R/O.DOOR NO.9-6-20/1 (1), SHIVAJIPALEM, NEAR KRISHNA TEMPLE, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 017.

DONKADAR DURGA VENKATESWARA RAO,, S/O.DONKADA SIVARAM MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC. ATTENDER, SPL. SESSIONS JUDGE TRAIL OF CASES SCS ANDSTS (POA). VISAKHAPATNAM, R/O.DOOR NO.1-32-5/1, NEW BANOJI NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM.

PODAGATLAPALLI RAM PRASAD,, S/O.PODAGATLAPALLI VENKATA SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS. OCC.. ATTENDER, SPL. SESSIONS JUDGE TRAIL OF CASES SCS

2

RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.17636 of 2024

ANDSTS (POA), R/.DOOR NO.38-34/7, FCI COLONY, MARRIPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 018.

MANGALAGIRI TIRUMALESWARA RAO, S/O. LATE M. LAKHMANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC.. ATTENDER, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PADERU, R/O.DOOR NO.10-24-4, PITHANI DIBBA, MAHARANIPETA, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 002

VEERNI GOWRI SHANKAR, S/O.NARAYANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC.. PROCESS SERVER, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHINTAPALLI, R/O.DOOR NO.13-752/3, ARILOVA, SECTOR-II B.T.R. NAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 040.

CHIPPADA SARASWATHI, W/O.P.SRINIVAS RAO, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC.. ATTENDER, SPL. SESSIONS JUDGE TRAIL OF CASES SCS ANDSTS (POA), VISAKHAPATNAM, R/O.DOOR NO.1660, ARILOVA COLONY, PANDURANGAPURAM, SECTOR 5, VISAKHAPATNAM.

MARADABUDI PRAVEEN KUMAR, S/O.M.DEMUDU, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC.. ATTENDER, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHINTAPALLI, R/O.DOOR NO.40-1-15/3/1, KASTHURI NAGAR, KAILASAPURAM, SALIGRAMAPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 024.

JANAGAM SURYAKUMARI, W/O.ROBBI SRINU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC.. ATTENDER, ADDITIONAL FAMILY COURT, VISAKHAPATNAM, RIO. DOOR NO.15-786, ARILOVA, VISAKHAPATNAM.

SMT.PENTA HEMALATHA, W/O.BONULA NAGESWAR RAO, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC.. ATTENDER, ADDITIONAL FAMILY COURT, VISAKHAPATNAM, R/O.DOOR NO.18-54-9, THADIVEEDHI, KGH DOWN, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 002.

SHAIK RAMZAN BIBI, W/O_MOHAMMAD YASEENPABA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC.. ATTENDER, ADDITIONAL FAMILY COURT, VISAKHAPATNAM, R/O.DOOR NO.9-9-47/5/1, MANGAPURAM COLONY, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 017.

3

RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.17636 of 2024

PYALA RANI, D/O. PYALA DEVUDU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC.. ATTENDER, ADDITIONAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, PADERU, R/O.DOOR NO.1-53, GURJAPALEM, RAMBILLI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM 531011.

SMT.URIMITTI SRAVANA KUMARI, W/O.R.SURYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC.. ATTENDER, ADDITIONAL FAMILY COURT, VISAKHAPATNAM, R/O.DOOR NO.15-16-20, SRI RANGAPURAM, BEACH ROAD, VISAKHAPATNAM.

MEDISETTY MADHUSUDHANA RAO, S/O.M. VENKATARAMANA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC.. ATTENDER, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, PADERU, R/O. DOOR NO.10-3912, RAMNAGAR, MAHARANIPETA, VISAKHAPATNAM 530 002.

GORLI KANAKA RAO, S/O.G. SIMHACHALAM, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC.. PROCESS SERVER, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, ARAKU, R/O.DOOR NO.3-38, CHINTALAGORLIVANIPALEM, PARAVADA MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM 531 021.

ADIBOINA LAKSHMI, W/O.A.SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCC.. PROCESS SERVER, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT, CHINTAPALLI R/O. DOOR NO.10-7-37, ANAKAPALLI STREET, VISAKHAPATNAM - 531 001.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LAW AND LEGISLATURE DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, A.P. HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI, NELAPADU, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

THE REGISTRAR, (ADMINISTRATION) A.P. HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHR NELAPADU, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AP

THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, VISAKHAPATNAM, AP.

4

RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.17636 of 2024

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in issuing proceedings Roc. No. 280/E1/2022 dated 03-02-2023 wherein rejected the representation dated 02-09-2022 made by the petitioners to regularize/absorb their services in the cadre of Attenders and Process Servers is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India consequently set aside the same by directing the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners as Attenders and Process Servers respectively with effect from the date of their initial appointment along with consequential benefits and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2024

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 pay the Minimum Time Scale to the petitioners attached to their posts i.e. Attenders/Process Servers in terms of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex court in State of Punjab and Others Vs Jagjit Singh and Others dated 26-10-2016, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

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 grant leave and permit the petitioners to file reply affidavit in WP No. 17636 of 2024and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1.KAVITHA GOTTIPATI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.VIVEK CHANDRA SEKHAR S

2.GP FOR SERVICES I

5

RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.17636 of 2024

The Court made the following Order:

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

The present Writ Petition is filed seeking regularization of employment, by persons who had been engaged on out-sourcing basis as Attenders and Process Servers in the Visakhapatnam District.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that they had been selected and appointed through a process of selection, conducted in the years 2007 & 2008 and that they are entitled for regularization in view of their long and uninterrupted services. The petitioners have also challenged the proceedings of the learned Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam, who, by his proceedings, dated 03.02.2023, had rejected the representation of the petitioners, dated 02.09.2022, for their regularization and absorption.

The aforesaid issues have come up before this Court, in W.P.No.22390 of 2024 & batch. This Court, on 10.12.2025, after reviewing the law and the earlier Judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, had held that such regularization is not permissible.

Accordingly, following the said Judgment, dated 10.12.2025, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

6

RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.17636 of 2024

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

closed.

________________________

R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J

Date: 10.02.2026 MJA

7

RRR, J & TCDS, J W.P.No.17636 of 2024

203

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

AND

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR

WRIT PETITION NO: 17636/2024

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

10.02.2026

MJA