Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/4025/2023 of D SEENAIAH Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 8 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 9th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 4025 OF 2023 Between: 1. D SEENAIAH, S/o Late D. Devadas, Aged 69 years, Statistical Officer (Retired), R/o
APHC010080812023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE 9th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
Between:
1. D SEENAIAH, S/o Late D. Devadas, Aged 69 years, Statistical Officer (Retired), R/o H.No.46/517-4DI, Budhawarpet, Kurnool-518002.
...Petitioner
AND
1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Finance and Planning (Plg.XI) Department, Secretariat Building, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.
2. The Director of Economics and Statistics, Andhra Pradesh, Vasudha Shelters, 'A' Block, 1st Floor, LIC Colony, Thimmapuram, Gollapudi, Vijayawada.
3. The Chief Planning Officer, Economics and Statistics Department, Collector's Complex, Chittoor.
...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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in not according notional promotion and benefits to the petitioner in the cadre of Deputy Director and Joint Director and not revising the pension and other retirement benefits in the cadre of Joint Director as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to accord notional benefits to the petitioner in the cadre of Deputy Director and Joint Director and further direct the 2nd respondent to revise the pension and other retirement benefits in the cadre of Joint Director and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023
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 call for the records pertaining to the promotions to the posts of Deputy Director and Joint Director since 2011 till date, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MANOJ KUMAR BETHAPUDI
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES I
The Court made the following order:
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:
1. The Writ Petition is filed for the following relief: “…………..to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in not according notional promotion and benefits to the petitioner in the cadre of Deputy Director and Joint Director and not revising the pension and other retirement benefits in the cadre of Joint Director as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to accord notional benefits to the petitioner in the cadre of Deputy Director and Joint Director and further direct the 2nd respondent to revise the pension and other retirement benefits in the cadre of Joint Director………”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, the respondents have filed their counter-affidavit stating that, after the petitioner’s retirement only, his juniors were promoted to the next higher category and that no junior was promoted during his service by overlooking his seniority. In view of the aforesaid position, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance raised in the writ petition no longer survives for consideration.
3. In view of the above, the writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous.
Interim orders, if any, granted earlier shall stand vacated, and all pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Date: 09.09.2026 SAK
85
Date: 09.09.2026
SAK