K. Vekata Ramudu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PANCAHYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI GUNTUR DISTRICT-52223.

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER OF HORTICULTURE, VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH-520001.

¶16

THE DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEE, REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN DISTRICT COLLECTOR KURNGOL DISTRICT-518001.

¶17

THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HORTICULTURE, ,KURNOOL DISTRICT-518001.

¶18

THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF HORTICULTURE, KURNOOL DISTRICT-518001.

¶19

2

¶20

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶22

1.KALAKOTI SUNIL KUMAR

¶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 D.RAMESH

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.9222 of 2026

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:

¶31

“…..to issue appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not awarding weightage marks to the Petitioner for appointment to the post of Village Agriculture Assistant in pursuance of Notification No. 1/2019 dated 26.07.2019, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to AP State and Subordinate Service Rules and Articles 14, 16 and 19(g), Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to consider case of the Petitioner.….”

¶32

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have

¶33

not considered the case of the petitioner under Para-15 of the notification dated 26.07.2019. According to the notification, the persons who work in the department as MPEO/MIAO/Field Consultant/Contract & Outsourcing Horticulture Officer in the Department of Horticulture will be given 1.5 marks for completion of every six (06) months and maximum of 15 marks.

¶34

4

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the weightage marks are not given to the petitioner as per Para-15 of the notification dated 26.07.2019 despite production of valid certificates from the competent authority and there is a mismatch to another candidate.

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in similar facts and circumstances, this Court has already granted relief in W.P.No.27513 of 2025 by order dated 21.01.2026, and therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to the same relief.

¶37

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents also does not dispute this fact.

¶38

Considering the submissions and in view of the orders dated 21.01.2026 passed by this Court in W.P.No.27513 of 2025, without going into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is at liberty to approach the concerned authorities and obtain the relevant certificate. Upon such approach, the authorities shall consider the petitioner’s request based on the record and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶39

5

¶40

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no

¶41

order as to costs.

¶42

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall

¶43

stand closed.

¶44

_______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH