Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/21788/2026 of SOLA GIRIDHAR Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 14 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3543] TUESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 21788/2026 Between: Sola Giridhar ...PETITIONER AND The State Of
APHC010338092026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE 15th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 21788/2026
Between:
Sola Giridhar
...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
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.
1. B. KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
2. G VIVEKANAND
The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya)
The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is, inaction of the respondent Nos.2 & 3, on the application dated 31.08.1999 of his father, Late Mr. Sola Rosaiah, stated to have been pending till date and that the said action is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, also heard Mr. G.Vivekanand, learned counsel representing respondent Nos.2 & 3.
3. Perused the material on record.
4. On 31.08.1999, the father of the petitioner appears to have been made an application to the 3rd respondent stating that he is not able to discharge his duties owing to ill health and decided to retire from service, with effect from 30.11.1999, and sought permission. The said application was duly considered and the learned District Judge, Guntur, vide proceedings dated 11.07.2002 and granted permission to the petitioner’s father to retire from service voluntarily, without the benefit of compassionate appointment to his dependent. In the said factual scenario, the respondents’ alleged inaction sought to be urged and the prayer in the writ petition are wholly unsustainable.
5. Be that as it may, Mr. G.Vivekanand, learned counsel representing respondent Nos.2 & 3, placed copies of order passed in Writ Petition No.19078 of 2019, dated 03.09.2021, for perusal of the Court. As can be seen from the order, the petitioner, on the earlier occasion approached this Court seeking compassionate appointment and a Coordinate bench of this Court after considering the submissions made, dismissed the writ petition. Interestingly, the petitioner, prior to the filing of the said writ petition, approached erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh by way of Writ Petition No.5078 of 2010, wherein the issue of permission granted to the petitioner’s father to retire voluntarily from his service without the benefit of compassionate appointment vide order dated 11.02.2002 was examined, and rejected by a Division Bench on 06.06.2011. These aspects have not been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the present writ petition, and the same amounts to suppression of material facts.
6. When this Court is inclined to dismiss the writ petition on the said ground, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks withdrawal of the writ petition. Considering the request made, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
_____________________ JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
Date:15.09.2026 DSB
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR
WP No.21788 of 2026 Date 15.09.2026
U
DSB