Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/30386/2026 of A. RADHAKRISHNA Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 14 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE 15th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 30386 OF 2026 Between: 1. A . RADHAKRISHNA, S/o Akki Narayana Reddy, aged 44 years, R/o Rajupalem village,
APHC010557482026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 15th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 30386 OF 2026
Between:
1. A. RADHAKRISHNA, S/o Akki Narayana Reddy, aged 44 years, R/o Rajupalem village, Venkatasettipalli post Badvel Mandal, YSR district. SI.No. 1288
2. P.Lakshmikantha Reddy, S/o Peddireddy Ramanaiah, aged 25 years, R/o H.No.
7-1-336, Gandhinagar, Badvel, YSR district. SI.No. 1118
3. G.Nagendra Kumar, S/o Godlaveeti Chinna Subbarayudu, aged 51 years, R/o 3- 2-203, Rajakastreet, Bavel, YSR district. SI.No. 770
4. M.Mohit Reddy, S/o Madu Subbaredy, aged 20 years,R/o Somasila village, Ananthasagaram mandal, SPS Nellore district. SI.No. 806
5. C.Ramanaiah, S/o Cherla Narasaiah, aged 34 years, R/o Ammavaripeta village, via Porumamilla, YSR Kadapa district. PiN -516193 SI. No. 849
...Petitioners
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal Secretary, Water Resources ( R
and R) Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi,Guntur district 5223
2. The Chief Engineer, NTR Telugu Ganga Project , Tirupati, Chittoor( Tirupati)
District. 517501
3. The District Collector, YSR district, Kadapa 516001
4. The Superintending Engineer, Somasila Project, Dargamitta, SPS Nellore district 524003
Page 1 of 4
...Respondents
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 toorders in exercise of extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the respondents'
inaction in providing employment to the petitioner in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 98
Irrigation Department Dt. 15.4.1986 though his name was included in the list published @ http//kadapa.ap.nic.in on 6.4.2023 as arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and violative of right to life, Article 14, 19, 21 and 300 A of the of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to consider their candidature for employment at par with the candidates mentioned in Memo No. 7477081/R and R/A2/2023-7 (C.No.2116015) dt.30.6.2025 and grant such other relief as may be deemed just and necessary in the interest of justice.
IA NO: 1 OF 2026
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 direct the respondents to consider petitioners' candidature for providing employment in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 98 Irrigation Department Dt. 15.4.1986 by extending the benefit at part with the candidates mentioned in Memo No. 7477081/R& R/A2/2023-7 (C.No.
2116015) dt. 30.6.2025 & Progs. SE/SKDGNSS/KDP/AB/EC/AB/CE.2/E20/260
M/259 M& 259 M dt. 22.4.2026. pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioners: KASA JAGANMOHAN REDDY
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES II
The Court made the following order:
Page 2 of 4
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
W.P.No.30386 of 2026
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the inaction of the Respondents in not providing employment to the Petitioners in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (PROJ. WING) Department, dated 15.04.1986, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The lands of the parents of the Petitioners were acquired in submerged villages, for the purpose of the Somasila Project in the years 1979-1980. As per G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (PROJ. WING) Department, dated 15.04.1986, employment was to be offered to the members of the displaced families or their dependents. The Petitioners, being the dependents of the original landowners, applied for employment. However, though their names were reflected in the shortlisted eligible persons, their cases were not considered for employment. Hence, this Writ Petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners relies on the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.33813 and 33814 of 2025, wherein employment was directed to be offered to the dependents of the landowners therein, and seeks similar relief in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the land acquisition took place in 1979-1980 and, despite the lapse of more than 45 years, employment has still not been provided.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that cases of Petitioners will be considered and necessary action will be initiated for
Page 3 of 4
providing employment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98 dated 15.04.1986, as per the rules in force.
5. Considering the fact that the lands of the Petitioners were acquired way back in 1979-1980, the delay in providing employment cannot be justified; more so, as the employment was to be treated as part of the promised compensation.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Respondents to consider the cases of the Petitioners for employment on par with similarly placed persons, as expeditiously as possible. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand dismissed. _________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY,J Date: 15.10.2026 KLP/VSR
Page 4 of 4
Loading citations and judicial treatment…