Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/22729/2024 of MARELLA SIVA PRASAD Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 29 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3573] WEDNESDAY, THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 22729/2024 Between: 1. MARELLA SIVA PRASAD, S/O. LAKSHMI NARASAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC ASST.
APHC010433992024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE 30th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI
WRIT PETITION NO: 22729/2024
Between:
1. MARELLA SIVA PRASAD, S/O. LAKSHMI NARASAIAH, AGED
ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC ASST. PROJECT DIRECTOR-ME/MIS IN
PRAKASAM, R/O. H.NO.35-3-69/29, SANJAY GANDHI COLONY, DEVUDI CHERUVU, ONGOLE, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH, INDIA. AADHAAR CARD NO.5454 6204 1336.
2. MUDE PEDDA GURAVAIAH, S/O. MUDE THIRUMALAIAH, AGED
ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC ASST. PROJECT DIRECTOR-JD IN
KADAPA DISTRICT, R/O. H.NO. 2-150, E.RAMAPURAM VILLAGE, VTC KOTHAKOTA, KALASAPADU MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, INDIA. AADHAAR CARD NO. 6777 3705 7296.
3. G.BALAJI, S/O. G.KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, OCC
ASST. PROJECT DIRECTOR-M AND E/MIS IN CHITTOOR
DISTRICT, R/O. H.NO.11-291/1, LAKSHMI NAGAR COLONY, 2ND
CROSS, PALAMANER-517408, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH, INDIA. AADHAAR CARD NO. 8855 1392 6333.
4. SMT.SANKU MADHAVI, D/O. SUBRAMANYAM, AGED ABOUT 36
YEARS, OCC ASST. PROJECT DIRECTOR-PGM IN VIZIANAGARAM
DISTRICT, R/O. H.NO. 4-68-23, GANDHI BOMMA CENTER, INDIRA
NAGAR, MAMIDI THOTA, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI
DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, INDIA. AADHAAR CARD NO. 2852
3388 3530.
5. THARIGOPULA MANOHAR, S/O. T.KONDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 43
YEARS, OCC ASST. PROJECT DIRECTOR-M AND E/MIS IN
ANANTHAPUR
DISTRICT,
R/O.D.NO.5/1,
PATHYAPURAM,
D.CHERLOPALLI
VILLAGE,
BATHALAPALLI
MANDAL,
ANANTHAPURAMU
DISTRICT,
ANDHRA
PRADESH,
INDIA.
AADHAAR CARD NO.5834 1989 8567.
6. VENNAPUSA RAMAMOHANA REDDY, S/O. VENNAPUSA BAYAPU
REDDY, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC ASST. PROJECT
DIRECTOR-PGM IN CHITTOOR DISTRICT, R/O. H.NO.20-1/2-6, NAIDU BUILDING, CHITTOOR 517 001, ANDHRA PRADESH, INDIA.
AADHAAR CARD NO. 3403 9751 6577.
7. PARLAPALLI VENKATESHWARLU, S/O. P.NARSIMHA, AGED
ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC ASST. PROJECT DIRECTOR-ID IN
NELLORE DISTRICT, R/O. H.NO.25-1-1840, 10TH STREET, SANJAY
GANDHI NAGAR, PODALAKURU ROAD, NELLORE TOWN AND
DISTRICT - 524004, ANDHRA PRADESH, INDIA. AADHAAR CARD
NO.3404 1525 4976.
8. RAVULACHERUVU RAM BHUPAL REDDY, S/O. ADI NARAYAN
REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC ASST. PROJECT
DIRECTOR-ID IN ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT VO. H.NO. 6-173A, O.C.
COLONY, VENKATAMPALLI VILLAGE, CHENNEKOTHAPALLE
MANDAL,
ANANTHAPURAMU
DISTRICT-515101,
ANDHRA
PRADESH, INDIA. AADHAAR CARD NO. 8923 6704 9082.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, IRRIGATION AND COMMENT AREA DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AT THULLUR VILLAGE
AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA
PRADESH, INDIA.
2. THE
ANDHRA
PRADESH
STATE
PROJECT
DIRECTORCUM
COMMISSIONER, , ANDHRA PRADESH IRRIGATION, AND
AGRICULTURE TRANSFORMATION PROJECT (APIIATP), 3RD
FLOOR, VYSYA BHAVAN, NAMBOORI GOPALA RAO STREET, HANUMANPET, VIJAYAWADA, NTR KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH, INDIA. ..
...RESPONDENT(S):
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 to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in not implementing the Memo No. MINR/94/2024-MI-G(2389607)-2, dated 17-05- 2024 passed by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and in violation of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequently direct the respondent No.2 to implement the Order of the 1st respondent vide Memo No. MINR/94/2024-MI- G(2389607)-2, dated 17-05-2024 forthwith by continuing the services of the petitioners No.1 to 8 Asst. Project Directors in their respective posting places and to safeguard their lives and career by following Constitution of India pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2024
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 may be pleased to direct the respondents No. 1 and 2 to continue the services of the petitioners No.1 to 8 herein as Asst. Project Directors in their respective places as it is, pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2025
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 direct the respondents to pay the Salaries to the petitioners herein by depositing the Salary into their individual accounts, pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. VENKATA RAGHU MANNEPALLI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES III
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The Writ Petition is filed declaring the action of respondent No.2 in not implementing Memo No.MINR/94/2024-MI-G(2389607)-2, dated 17.05.2024, issued by the 1st respondent, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard Mr.V.R.Manepalli, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr.S.Sharat Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-II, appearing for respondents.
3. The respondents have filed their counter-affidavit stating that the agreement between the petitioners and respondents is a fixed time agreement, which ceases to hold good on completion of period and there is no commitment on either side to extend their agreement thereafter. The agreement period of petitioners ended on 31.03.2024 and was not extended further, basing on the need. The activities under APIIATP were curtailed by the Government from Rs.1,600 crores to Rs.720 crores, and many of the Contractors had requested pre-closure of the works. The World Bank, which has to provide loan to a tune of 70% of the project cost, informed to get the project closure report prepared by the Third Party Monitoring and Evaluation Agency. Hence, the services of the petitioners are not required for the project, and the project closing date is 31.10.2025. Hence, the question of continuation of the petitioners pursuant to the order of the 1st respondent does not arise.
4. The said counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2 on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Contradicting the said contentions, no rejoinder is filed by the learned counsel for the petitioners.
5. As stated in the counter-affidavit, the project has been closed. Therefore, question of continuing the petitioners, who are stated to be contractual employees, does not arise. The agreement between the petitioners and respondents has been placed along with counter-affidavit. As the agreement itself is concluded in view of expiry of contract period, this Court does not find any force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Date : 30-09-2026 BMS