Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/20238/2026 of PONNEKANTI SARALA Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 22 July 2026
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
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. 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