Andhra Pradesh High Court

WP/20238/2026 of PONNEKANTI SARALA Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 22 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] THURSDAY, THE 23rd DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 20238/2026 Between: Ponnekanti Sarala ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

APHC010375762026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA

PRADESH

AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY, THE 23rd DAY OF JULY 2026

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

WRIT PETITION NO: 20238/2026

Between:

Ponnekanti Sarala

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

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…

1. VENKATA DURGA RAO ANANTHA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. The Court made the following:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY W.P.No.20238 of 2026 O R DE R:

The Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in preventing the Petitioner from discharging her duties as Office Subordinate/Attender at Joint Collector’s Camp Office, Guntur, from May, 2026, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. The Petitioner was appointed as Office Subordinate on 11.10.2021 for utilization of her services wherever needed and she has been discharging her duties ever since.

3. Sri M.A. Saleem, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, would submit that the Respondents are not preventing the services of the Petitioner and that she had voluntarily stopped attending the Office. He further submits that several complaints were received against the Petitioner regarding her misbehaviour at workplace.

4. Heard the learned counsels.

5. The Petitioner was appointed on 11.10.2021 on an outsourcing basis for utilization of her services wherever needed. In the event the Respondents do not require the services of the Petitioner, the Respondents shall put on notice the Petitioner about her non- requirement.

6. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

i) The Respondents are directed to continue the Petitioner till there is a requirement of her services.

ii) In the event the Respondent Authorities do not want to continue the Petitioner in service, they shall put on notice the Petitioner before removing the Petitioner from service.

iii) There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J Date: 23.07.2026 eha

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

WRIT PETITION NO:20238/2026 Dt. 23.07.2026

eha

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