Disposed¶43

S. Ravi, Anantapur Dist & Another v. Registrar, Sku, Anantapur Dist & Another

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Feb 2026WP/34010/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WP 34010/2017 (APHC010237162017), High Court of A.P. at Amaravati, Justice Maheswara Rao Kuncheam, 20.02.2026; challenge to SKU Backlog Assistant Professor / Associate Professor notifications dt. 14-09-2017 (ST posts) under Article 226; writ petition closed without adjudication, no costs; fresh 2023 notification and connected pending writ petition noted; petitioners S. Ravi and Dr. V. Hanuma Reddy (Anantapur / YSR Kadapa).

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was closed recording the Standing Counsel's submissions, with no order as to costs, and all pending applications were directed to stand closed. ¶43

S. Ravi, Anantapur Dist & Another Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition was closed recording the Standing Counsel's submissions, with no order as to costs, and all pending applications were directed to stand closed.

¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether the notifications dated 14.09.2017 issued by the respondent University for recruitment to Assistant Professor and Associate Professor posts are illegal insofar as the ST-category posts are concerned, warranting their being set aside and a direction to the University to issue a proper notification.

¶34

Court's answer

Recording the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent University (that the notification dated 14.09.2017 was not acted upon and a fresh notification was issued in 2023), and at the request of counsel for the petitioners, the Court closed Writ Petition No. 34010 of 2017 with no order as to costs; the legality of the impugned notifications was not adjudicated.

¶43

Ratio / Principle

As a sequel to the closure of the writ petition, all pending applications shall stand closed.

¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 34010 of 2017 (High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Maheswara Rao Kuncheam J., decided 20.02.2026): Two ST-category aspirants for the post of Assistant Professor in Sri Krishnadevaraya University challenged recruitment Notifications Nos. SKU/T-Estt./Advt. 3/Backlog-Asst. Prof./2017 and SKU/T-Estt./Advt. 2/Backlog-Asso. Prof./2017, both dated 14.09.2017, seeking a writ of mandamus declaring them illegal qua the ST posts and directing issuance of a proper notification. The respondents filed no counter-affidavit. At the final hearing the University's Standing Counsel submitted that the 2017 notification was never acted upon and that a fresh notification issued in 2023 was already under challenge in a separate pending writ petition; petitioners' counsel accordingly sought closure. The Court closed the writ petition recording those submissions, with no order as to costs, and all pending applications stood closed. No finding was rendered on the legality of the impugned notifications.

¶1

¶2

APHC010237162017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

[3504]

¶6

FRIDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 34010/2017

¶10

Between:

¶11

S. RAVI, S/O. S. OSURAPPA, AGED 25 YEARS, H. NO. 9-48, SULTHANPET, NARPALA (VIL. & MDL.), ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.

¶12

DR. V. HANUMA REDDY,, S/O. V. RAMACHANDRA REDDY, AGED 31 YEARS, R/O.H. NO. 1-65, BUBUSANI PALLI (VIL.), MYLAVARAM (MDL.), JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.

¶13

...PETITIONER(S)

¶14

AND

¶15

Sri KRISHNADEVARAYA UNIVERSITY, REP. BY REGISTRAR, S.K. UNIVERSITY, ANANTHAPURAMU, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT.

¶16

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

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 toto issue any writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS delcaring the notification Nos. SKU/T-Estt./Advt. 3/Backlog-Asst. Prof./2017, dt. 14-09-2017 for Assistant Professors and SKU/T-Estt./Advt. 2/Backlog-Asso. Prof./2017, dt. 14-09-2017 for Associate

¶19

¶20

Professors as far as the ST posts are concerned as illegal and by setting aside the same direct the respondent university to issue prope notification

¶21

IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 42295 OF 2017

¶22

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 to stay all further proceeding in respect of the notification Nos. SKU/T-Estt./Advt. 3/Backlog-Asst. Prof./2017, dt. 14-09-2017 for Assistant Professors and SKU/T-Estt./Advt. 2/Backlog Asso. Prof./2017, dt. 14-09-2017 for Associate Professors as far as ST posts are concerned pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶24

1.A V S LAXMI

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶26

1.O UDAYA KUMAR SC For S K UNIVERSITY

¶27

2.GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION (AP)

¶28

The Court made the following:

¶29

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 34010/2017

¶31

ORDER:-

¶32

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following main prayer:

¶33

“to issue any writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the notification Nos.SKU/TEstt./Advt.3/Backlog-Asst.Prof./2017, dt. 14.09.2017 for Assistant Professors and SKU/T-Estt./Advt.2/Backlog-Asso. Prof./2017, dt.14.09.2017 for Associate Professors as far as the ST posts are concerned as illegal and by setting aside the same direct the respondent university to issue prope notification and to pass …..”

¶34

The substratum of the case is that the petitioners are aspirants for the post of Assistant Professor in the respondent University under the ST category. Accordingly, they have challenged the notification dated 14.09.2017. The respondents have not filed any counter-affidavit.

¶35

When the matter was taken up for hearing, on 13.02.2026 this Court passed the following order:

¶36

“No representation for the petitioners in the morning and afternoon sessions.

¶37

Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent University submits that notification under challenge in the present writ petition had not been acted upon and subsequently another fresh notification was issued by the respondent University.

¶38

¶39

In order to give one more opportunity to the petitioners, post next week under the caption for dismissal.”

¶40

Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, Mr. O. Udaya Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent University, submitted that the notification dated 14.09.2017 has not been acted upon. The learned Standing Counsel further submitted that, subsequent to the said notification dated 14.09.2017, another notification was issued in the year 2023, and a writ petition challenging the notification of 2023 is also pending before this Court.

¶41

In view of the same, Mr. S.Prem, learned counsel representing Ms.A.V.S. Lakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the matter may be closed by recording the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent University.

¶42