Andhra Pradesh High Court

WP/19808/2024 of VUYYALA VENKATA SAMBASIVA RAO Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 28 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3573] TUESDAY, THE 29th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 19808/2024 Between: 1. VUYYALA VENKATA SAMBASIVA RAO, S/O. V. VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

APHC010390542024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE 29th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI

WRIT PETITION NO: 19808/2024

Between:

1. VUYYALA VENKATA SAMBASIVA RAO, S/O. V. VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/0.H.N0.7-479A, TIPPARLA BAZAR, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS

PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ENERGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

2. THE

CHAIRMAN

AND

MANAGING

DIRECTOR,

APCPDCL,

CORPORATE OFFICE, DR. YSR VIDUT SOUDHA, BESIDE

POLYTECHNIC COLLAGE, ITI ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA

DISTRICT.

3. THE

SUPERINTENDING

ENGINEER,

OPERATION

APCPDCL,

AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

...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 challenging the orders passed by the 2nd respondent vide Memo No.CMD/DIR/TECH/GM (HR), DGM-I/PO-II NO.328/23, dated 12.07.2023 in not modifying the date of regularization of the petitioner as 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008 as illegal, arbitrary, improper, unjust and consequently direct the Respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008 and pass 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 to

direct the Respondents No.2 to consider my representation 14.05.2024 by regularizing the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008, and pass 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 may be pleased to fix an early date for hearing of W.P. 19808 of 2024 and expedite the hearing of W.P.No.19808 of 2024 and pass IA NO: 2 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 may be pleased to seeking to direct the respondents to consider my appointment as 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008, for the limited purposes of promotion to be effected to the post of Junior Engineer, and effect promotions interns of the Memo.No.SE/0/GNT/PO(ADM)/C1/D.N0.1105/12, dated 06.06.2013, till the disposal of the Writ Petition and pass IA NO: 3 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 may be pleased to grant leave to the Respondents in the W.P.No.19808 of 2024 to file Counter Affidavit in the above writ petition and to 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 grant leave to the Respondents in the W.P.No.19808 of 2024 to file Counter Affidavit in the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. Y MAHA LAKSHMI

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR ENERGY

2. V V SATISH

The Court made the following:

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

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…

ORDER:

The Writ Petition is filed challenging the order passed by the 2nd respondent vide Memo No.CMD/DIR/Tech/GM(HR)/DGM-I/PO- II/D.No.328/2023, dated 12.07.2023, in refusing to modify the date of regularization of the petitioner as 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008.

2. Heard Smt.Y.Mahalakshmi, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Energy for respondent No.1, and Sri Abdul Mathews, learned counsel representing Sri V.V.Satish, learned Standing Counsel for APCPDCL, for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

3. Petitioner joined as Sub-Engineer on yearly contract basis in the Operations Section, Komarada Mandal, Vizianagaram District, in APEPDCL on 19.06.2006. Thereafter, petitioner got transferred from APEPDCL to APSPDCL on mutual basis with one M.Seshagiri, Sub-Engineer, Operations, Tsundur, vide Memo dated 10.01.2008. Accordingly, petitioner joined as Sub-Engineer on yearly contract basis in Operations Section, Tsundur, on 21.02.2008. As per the terms of appointment, on completion of two years of service under yearly contract basis, petitioner’s services are to be regularized.

4. The employees working under yearly contract basis in APSPDCL made a representation to the Chairman and Managing Director for regularizing their services, including those who had not completed two years of service. Pursuant to same, vide S.O.O.Ms.No.141, dated 03.10.2008, services of those employees were regularized. Accordingly, petitioner’s services were also regularized on the said date, though the petitioner had completed his two years of service by 19.06.2008 itself. Thus, petitioner made a representation to the respondents seeking to regularize his service with effect from 19.06.2008 instead of 03.10.2008.

5. As there was no response from the authorities, he filed Writ Petition No.10526 of 2023 and this Court, vide order dated 25.04.2023, directed the authorities to consider and dispose of the representation dated 28.08.2022 and pass appropriate orders. Pursuant to which, the respondents have passed the order impugned in the present Writ Petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the respondents have stated that a common date of regularization was assigned to all the persons, including the petitioner, by regularizing their services with effect from 03.10.2008, no reasons have been assigned in the proceedings dated 12.07.2023 for denying the petitioner regularization with effect from 19.06.2008, on which date he had completed two years of service on contract basis.

7. It is further submitted that counter affidavit filed by the respondents only speaks about the persons who had not completed two years of service were regularized by assigning the notional date of regularization as 03.10.2008. In the instant case, the petitioner had already completed two years of service on contract basis by 19.06.2008, as such, his case has to be considered on completion of two years.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the proceedings dated 01.01.2009, wherein it reveals that, in respect of

Sub-Engineers, regularization was taken place on the date of completion of two years service on contract period. However, the respondents have not assigned any reason for not considering the case of the petitioner with effect from 19.06.2008, on which date he completed two years of service on contract basis and the counter affidavit is also silent on this aspect as to what was the reason for not considering the petitioner’s case from the said date.

9. In view of the same, the order impugned in the Writ Petition i.e., Memo No.CMD/DIR/Tech/GM(HR)/DGM-I/PO-II/D.No.328/2023, dated 12.07.2023, is hereby set aside. The matter is remitted back to the 2nd respondent for fresh consideration and to pass reasoned order by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 28.08.2022, duly providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

10. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

______________________________ JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Date : 29-09-2026 BMS

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead