Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/185/2007 of P.Subrahmanyam, s/o P.Nagaiah, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by its on 24 June 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3562] THURSDAY, THE 25th DAY OF JUNE 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBHENDU SAMANTA WRIT PETITION NO: 185/2007 Between: 1. P.SUBRAHMANYAM, S/O
APHC010001842007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 25th DAY OF JUNE 2026
PRESENT
WRIT PETITION NO: 185/2007
Between:
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. P.SUBRAHMANYAM, S/O P.NAGAIAH,, PACKER IN TTDS, R/O TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
2. N.MADHUSUDANA RAO, S/O HANUMANTHA RAO,, PACKER IN TTDS, R/O TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
3. V.HARIKRISHNA MOORTHY, S/O VENKATESH,, PACKER IN TTDS, R/O TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
4. A.SANKARAIAH, S/O VENKATASWAMY,, PACKER IN TTDS, R/O TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
5. G.BALAKRISHNAIAH, S/O BODEBBA,, PACKER IN TTDS, R/O TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
6. S.RAJESH KUMAR, S/O SRIDHAR RAO,, PACKER IN TTDS, R/O TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
7. A.VENKATESAM, S/O GOVINDAIAH,, PACKER IN TTDS, R/O TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
8. S.GANESH, S/O ANDAIAH,, PACKER IN TTDS, R/O TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH REPRESENTED BY ITS, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (ENDTS.III) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
HYDERABAD.
2. THE TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
...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 toto issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in taking steps to fill up all the vacancies of Asst./Shroff in TTDs ignoring the Resolution No.122 dt.5/6-5-2006 of the TTDs Trust Board, communicated by the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent vide letter Roc.No.B3/23159/2004 dt.24-5-2006 and also not sending the revised draft preliminary notification to the 1st respondent in terms of the Govt. Memo No.22935/Endts.III/A2/2006-2 dt.9-8-2006 as arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal and contrary to law and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to forthwith send the revised draft preliminary notification to the 1st respondent in terms of the Govt. Memo dt.9-8-2006 before filling up the existing vacancies of Asst./Shroff in TTDs and further direct the 1st respondent to take immediate steps to issue orders in terms of the letter Roc.No.B3/23159/2004 dt.24-5-2006 of the 2nd respondent and with all other consequential benefits monetary and otherwise and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 4 OF 2007(WPMP 234 OF 2007 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 grant interim directions directing the 2nd respondent to forthwith send the revised draft preliminary notification to the 1st respondent in terms of the Govt.Memo No.22935/Endts.III/A2/2006-2 dt.9-8-2006 pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 5 OF 2007(WPMP 235 OF 2007
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 grant interim directions directing the 2nd respondent to keep 8 vacancies of Asst./Shroff in TTDs unfilled for the petitioners pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. V JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS
2. C SRINIVASA BABA
3. A K JAYAPRAKASH RAO The Court made the following:
Date of reserved for orders : ----------- Date of pronouncement : 25-06-2026 Date of uploading
:
WRIT PETITION No.185 of 2007 ORDER: (per Hon‟ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) On 18.06.2026, the following order was passed: “On 23.04.2026, the Co-ordinate Bench passed the following order: “Even though the matter is posted under the caption „for orders‟, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners in this old matter of the year 2007.
Therefore, list the matter, under the caption „for dismissal‟, on 18.06.2026.”
2. Request has been made on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioners for adjournment.
3. Post next week under the same caption „for dismissal‟.
2. The said order also referred to the previous order dated 23.04.2026.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he has addressed a letter to the petitioners, but has not yet received any instructions.
4. The writ petition pertains to the year 2007.
5. The Writ Petition is dismissed for want of instructions. However, if the petitioners’ counsel receives instructions, liberty is granted to file an appropriate application. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J
______________________ SUBHENDU SAMANTA, J Date: 25.06.2026 Pab
Whether the order is: Speaking ☑ Reasoned
Reportable
Non-reportable ☑
WRIT PETITION No.185 of 2007 DATE: 25.06.2026
Pab