Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/9130/2026 of VANKADARA NAGENDRA PRASAD Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 14 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 9130 Between: 1. VANKADARA NAGENDRA PRASAD, S/O V. SREERAMULU, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, WORKING AS SCHOOL ASSISTANT (MATHEMATICS), MUNICIPAL HIGH SCHOOL,
APHC010179172026
IN TH
WEDNESD
TWO
THE HON
WRI
Between:
1. VANKADARA NAG
ABOUT
YEA
(MATHEMATICS),
KADIRI, ANANTAPU
2. M. SUDHAKAR,,
YEARS, WORK
SCIENCE), MUNIC
ANANTAPURAMU
PRASAD STREET,
1. THE STATE OF A
SECRETARY,
SECRETARIAT, VE
2. THE COMMISSION
ANDHRA PRADESH
3. THE DISTRICT
DISTRICT, PUTTAP
4. THE MUNICIPAL C
SRI SATHYA SAI D
E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
DAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APR
O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
NOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
IT PETITION NO: 9130 OF 2026
GENDRA PRASAD, S/O V. SREERA
ARS,
WORKING
AS
SCHOOL
MUNICIPAL HIGH SCHOOL, MAS
UR DISTRICT.
S/O M.C. SUBBARAYUDU, AGED
KING AS SCHOOL ASSISTANT
CIPAL HIGH SCHOOL, MASHANAMP
DISTRICT, R/O D.NO.1-33-2-1K,
KADIRI - 515591.
...P
AND
ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY IT
SCHOOL
EDUCATION
D
ELAGAPUDI. 522237
NER AND DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL
H.
EDUCATIONAL
OFFICER, SRI
PARTHI. 515134
COMMISSIONER, KADIRI MUNICIPA
DISTRICT. 515134
...RES
DESH
IL
H
AMULU, AGED
L
ASSISTANT
SHANAMPETA,
D ABOUT 46
(BIOLOGICAL
PETA, KADIRI,
RAJENDRA
PETITIONER(S)
TS PRINCIPAL
DEPARTMENT,
L EDUCATION,
SATHYA SAI
ALITY, KADIRI,
SPONDENT(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 to issue any Writ, Order, or Direction, particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents in including and continuing the School Assistant Teachers who are not qualified TET in the seniority list above the petitioners as illegal arbitrary violative of article 14,16
and RTE Act and the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anjuman Ishaat-e-Taleem Trust vs State of Maharashtra and Ors and further direct the respondents to revise the seniority list by removing all un-qualified candidates from the seniority list by considering the petitioners objections Dt 23.03.2026
and Consequently direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's case for promotion to the post of Head Master Grade-II in accordance to the revised Seniority list by placing them above the ineligible candidates and pass 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 to direct the respondents to revise the seniority list by excluding the ineligible candidates in accordance with the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anjuman Ishaat- e-Taleem Trust vs State of Maharashtra & Ors And as per the RTE Act.
IA NO: 2 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 May be pleased to amend the Cause Title District name and pincode of the Respondent.No.3, was wrongly typed as “Sri Satya Sai District, Puttaparthi- 515134” Instead of “Ananthapur District, Anantapuramu-515001” direct the office to duly carrying out the amendment in the Affidavit, Petition and Interlocutory Application and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.S SRAVANA SANDHYA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR SERVICES III
2.B SIVA SANKARA RAO SC For Services to Municipalities in rayalaseema, Nellore
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 9130 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:-
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “….to issue order or orders, direction or directions, Writ or Writs particularly one in the nature Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the Respondents in including and continuing the School Assistant Teachers who are not qualified TET in the seniority list above the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14,16 and RTE Act and the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anjuman Ishaat-e-Taleem Trust vs State of Maharashtra and Ors and further direct the respondents to revise the seniority list by removing all un- qualified candidates from the seniority list by considering the petitioners objections Dt 23.03.2026 and Consequently direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's case for promotion to the post of Head Master Grade-II in accordance to the revised Seniority list by placing them above the ineligible candidates …”
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for the Respondents.
3. The grievance of the Petitioners is that the Respondents have not adhered to the Rule and also the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.1385 of 2025, while preparing the impugned tentative seniority list. In fact, said issue has fallen for consideration before the Hon’ble Apex Court, which reads as follows:- “…216. Bearing in mind their predicament, we invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and direct that those teachers who have less than five years' service left, as on date, may continue in service till they attain the age of superannuation without qualifying the TET. However, we make it clear that if any such teacher (having less than five years' service left) aspires for promotion, he will not be considered eligible without he/she having qualified the TET.
217. Insofar as in-service teachers recruited prior to enactment of the RTE Act and having more than 5 years to retire on superannuation are concerned, they shall be under an obligation to qualify the TET within 2 years from date in order to continue in service. If any of such teachers fail to qualify the TET within the time that we have allowed, they shall have to quit service. They may be compulsorily retired; and paid whatever terminal benefits they are entitled to. We add a rider that to qualify for the terminal benefits, such teachers must have put in the qualifying period of service, in accordance with the rules. If any teacher has not put in the qualifying service and there is some deficiency, his/her case may be considered by the appropriate department in the Government upon a representation being made by him/her…”
4. But surprisingly, the Respondents have prepared the tentative impugned Seniority List dated 25.03.2026 without considering the aforesaid observations and they have prepared solely based on the length of service.
5. By noticing the same, the Petitioner has submitted his objections on 23.03.2026. Without considering the said objections, the Respondents are proceeding with finalization of the seniority list. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.
6. The learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the Respondents has submitted that the Writ Petition itself is premature, as the Respondents have prepared the tentative seniority list based on the length of service, and they would finalize the seniority based on the objections and also by following the observations made by the Hon’ble Apex Court referred supra.
7. Considering the submissions, the present Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Respondents, more particularly respondent No.3, to consider the objections filed by the Petitioners in terms of the observations made by the Hon’ble Apex Court in judgment referred supra, while preparing the final seniority list. There shall be no order as to costs.
The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
__________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date: 15.04.2026 KK