Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/17341/2026 of B LAKSHMI Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 2 July 2026
for orders : --- Date of pronouncement : 03.07.2026 Date of uploading : APHC010326322026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3460] FRIDAY, THE 3rd DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 17341/2026
Date of reserved for orders
: ---
Date of pronouncement
: 03.07.2026
Date of uploading
:
APHC010326322026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE 3rd DAY OF JULY 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
WRIT PETITION NO: 17341/2026
Between:
1. B LAKSHMI, D/O.BALAKOTI, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC
PROHIBITION EXCISE SUB-INSPECTOR, PROHIBITION
EXCISE STATION, TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY
REVENUE
(EXCISE)
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS,
AMARAVATI,
VELAGAPUDI,
GUNTUR DISTRICT -522238
2. THE
COMMISSIONER
OF
PROHIBITION
EXCISE,
MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522503
3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF PROHIBITION EXCISE, KAKINADA DIVISION, KAKINADA DISTRICT 533001
...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 topleased to issue an appropriate order or directions more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Prohibition Excise Inspector under ST category to meet the adequacy of 6 posts out of 98 posts of cadre strength of Prohibition Excise Inspectors in Zone II is illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as Prohibition Excise Inspector in the ensuing promotions against the ST
category under 6percent quota to meet the adequacy, and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
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 direct the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated 21-05- 2026 made by the petitioner for promotion to the post of Prohibition & Excise Inspector in Zone II in the ensuing promotions against the ST category under 6% quota to meet the adequacy, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KAVITHA GOTTIPATI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
The Court made the following:
WRIT PETITION No.17341 of 2026
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 present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of Respondents in not considering the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Prohibition and Excise Inspector under S.T category, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The Petitioner belongs to Schedule Tribe (for short, ‘S.T’) category and was appointed as Junior Assistant in the year 2009 under S.C/S.T backlog vacancies in Krishna district. Subsequently, the Petitioner was promoted as Prohibition and Excise Sub-Inspector on 03.08.2013. As the Petitioner belongs to S.T category, she claims for promotion against the 6% reservation earmarked for the S.T. category under Rule No.22 of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 (for short, ‘the rules’) and a representation was given by the Petitioner on 21.05.2026 requesting consideration for promotion under the said reservation. As the representation given by the Petitioner is not being considered, the present Writ Petition came to be filed.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services submitted that the representation given by the Petitioner would be examined in accordance with the rules and taking note of the adequacy.
4. Heard the counsels.
5. Considering the submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of, with the following directions:-
(i) The Respondent-Authorities are directed to consider the representation, dated 21.05.2026 given by the Petitioner in accordance with the rules and adequacy.
(ii) . No order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY
Date: 03.07.2026 chs Whether the order is: Speaking ✔ Reasoned
Reportable
Non-reportable ✔
WRIT PETITION No.17341 of 2026 Dated: 03.07.2026
chs