Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/29049/2026 of Girish Gannavarapu, Vs The Union of India on 14 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 29049 OF 2026 Between: 1. Girish Gannavarapu,, S/o. GVSS Prasad, Aged about 34 years, Occ Assistant Secretary Gr-I,
APHC010531632026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF JULY 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 29049 OF 2026
Between:
1. Girish Gannavarapu,, S/o. GVSS Prasad, Aged about 34 years, Occ Assistant Secretary Gr-I, Visakhapatnam Port Authority, Visakhapatnam Rio. Flat no. 501, Ramachandra Enclave, Sri Patabhi Seetha Rama Nagar, Bakannapalem, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh 530048
...Petitioner
AND
1. The Union of India, Rep by its Secretary, Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways Transport Bhawan, 1, Parliament Street, New Delhi 110001.
2.
The
Visakhapatnam
Port
Authority,
Rep.
by
its
Chairperson,
Administrative Office Building, Port Area, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh
530035.
3. The Indian Ports Association, Rep. by its Executive Director (G), South Tower, NBCC Place, Bhisham Pitamah Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi
110003.
...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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly, the action of the 2 nd Respondent in issuing
Page 1 of 4
the letter dated 22.07.2026 to the 3rd Respondent, informing that the Petitioners application for 'he post of Senior Manager (HR), in the scale of pay of Rs.60,000-1,80,000/- under the Industrial Dearness Allowance (IDA)
pattern, on deputation basis, could not be forwarded due to administrative reasons, as being illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14
and 16(1) of the Constitution of India, and Consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to forward the application for the post of Senior Manager (HR) on deputation basis to the 3 rd Respondent applications or for any similar posts that may be applied for in the future by the Petitioner and pass 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 pleased to direct the 2nd Respondent to forward the Petitioner's application for the post of Senior Manager (HR) in the 3rd Respondent organisation, pursuant to Vacancy Circular No. IPA/PHRD/2026, dated 15.06.2026 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: AJAY KUMAR KANAPARTHI
Counsel for the Respondents: G.ARUN SHOWRI(CENTRAL GOVT.
COUSEL)
The Court made the following order:
Page 2 of 4
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
W.P.No.29049 of 2026
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed questioning the action of 2nd respondent in not forwarding the application of the Petitioner for appointment to the post of Senior Manager (HR) on deputation basis in Respondent No.3-organisation, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Petitioner is working as Assistant Secretary, Grade-I, in the General Administration Department of Respondent No.2. While so, Respondent No.3 had issued vacancy circular dated 15.06.2026 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for various posts on deputation basis. One of the posts notified was that of Senior Manager (HR) for tenure of three years. As per the procedure, the application should be forwarded by the 2nd Respondent in terms of office memo dated 24.11.2022. The Petitioner having requisite qualification submitted an application to the 2nd Respondent and the same was rejected vide impugned proceedings on the ground of administrative exigencies. Hence, the writ petition is filed.
3. Learned Standing Counsel for Respondent No.2 on instructions submits that there is a short fall of man power in the Respondent No.2-Port Trust and therefore, the application of the Petitioner was rejected.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner disputes the short fall of man power.
Page 3 of 4
5. Heard Sri. K. Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Sri. G. Arun Showri, learned counsel for Respondent No.1.
6. As there is a factual dispute with regard to the claim and counter claim, and considering the limited scope of this Court to examine these aspects, the writ petition is disposed of with the following direction:
i) The 2nd Respondent is directed to re-examine the issue of forwarding the application of the Petitioner on deputation basis, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
ii) 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…