Dismissed

Sola Giridhar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Sept 2026WP/21788/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged alleged inaction by respondents on his father's 1999 application for voluntary retirement without compassionate appointment benefits. The court found the petitioner had previously filed two writ petitions on the same issue, both dismissed, and had suppressed these material facts. The petitioner sought withdrawal, and the court dismissed the petition as withdrawn with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed

Sola Giridhar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Service and Employment | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010338092026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3543]

¶5

TUESDAY, THE 15^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 21788/2026

Between:

Sola Giridhar

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶17

1.B. KOTESWARA RAO

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

2.G VIVEKANAND

The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya)

¶23

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is, inaction of the respondent Nos.2 & 3, on the application dated 31.08.1999 of his father, Late Mr. Sola Rosaiah, stated to have been pending till date and that the said action is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.

¶24

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, also heard Mr. G.Vivekanand, learned counsel representing respondent Nos.2 & 3.

¶25

Perused the material on record.

¶26

On 31.08.1999, the father of the petitioner appears to have been made an application to the 3^rd respondent stating that he is not able to discharge his duties owing to ill health and decided to retire from service, with effect from 30.11.1999, and sought permission. The said application was duly considered and the learned District Judge, Guntur, vide proceedings dated 11.07.2002 and granted permission to the petitioner’s father to retire from service voluntarily, without the benefit of compassionate appointment to his dependent. In the said factual scenario, the respondents’ alleged inaction sought to be urged and the prayer in the writ petition are wholly unsustainable.

¶27

Be that as it may, Mr. G.Vivekanand, learned counsel representing respondent Nos.2 & 3, placed copies of order passed in Writ Petition No.19078 of 2019, dated 03.09.2021, for perusal of the Court. As can be seen from the order, the petitioner, on the earlier occasion approached this Court seeking compassionate appointment and a Coordinate bench of this Court

¶28

¶29

after considering the submissions made, dismissed the writ petition. Interestingly, the petitioner, prior to the filing of the said writ petition, approached erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh by way of Writ Petition No.5078 of 2010, wherein the issue of permission granted to the petitioner’s

¶30

father to retire voluntarily from his service without the benefit of compassionate appointment vide order dated 11.02.2002 was examined, and rejected by a Division Bench on 06.06.2011. These aspects have not been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the present writ petition, and the same amounts to suppression of material facts.

¶31

When this Court is inclined to dismiss the writ petition on the said ground, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks withdrawal of the writ petition. Considering the request made, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶32

__________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶33

_____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR

¶34

Date:15.09.2026 DSB

¶35

¶36

¶37

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶38

AND

¶39

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR

¶40

WP No.21788 of 2026

¶41

Date 15.09.2026

¶42

¶43

DSB

Sola Giridhar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sola Giridhar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases