Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/9482/2026 of Thanga Tirupalu, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 8 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 9482/2026 Between: 1. THANGA TIRUPALU,, S/O. PITCHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O.
APHC010186732026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 9482/2026
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. THANGA TIRUPALU,, S/O. PITCHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.6/7/101, VIDYANAGAR, BADVEL MUNICIPALITY AND MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.
2. SAMSANI SUBBALASHUMMA,, D/O. S.RAJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.2/229, N. GOLLAPALLI, NAGISETTY PALLI PANCHAYATHI, B.MATTAM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.
3. D. SREENIVASULU, S/O. D. PULLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O. G. NARASIMHAPURAM, T.SOUDARAVARIPALLE POST, B.MATTAM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.
4. DABBUGODIA RAMANAIAH,, S/O. PULLAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O. G. NARASIMHAPURAM T.SOUDARAVARIPALLE POST, B.MATTAM MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.
5. MYLA TIRUPAL,, S/O. MYLAMUNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O. KAMALAKURU VILLAGEAND POST ATLUR MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522503.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, IRRIGATION AND CAD (RR) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522503.
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTORCUMCHAIRMAN, DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEE, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT - 516 001.
4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, TELUGU GANGA OFFICE, ALIPIRI BYPASS ROAD, SRINIVASA NAGAR, TIRUPATHI-517507.
5. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, SSP CIRCLE, MG MALL.DARGAMITTA, NELLORE SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S):
The Court made the following ORDER:
1. The present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of Respondent Nos.2 to 5 in not including the names of the petitioners in the seniority list of 1656 candidates who seek employment under the displaced persons quota of the Somasila Project, vide Memo No.480-LAR (2)87/2 dated 24.08.1987 issued by Respondent No.1, despite their eligibility in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation and CAD (PW) Department, dated 15.04.1986, as illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in similar facts and circumstances, this Court has already granted relief in W.P. No.33135 of 2023 by order dated 23.01.2025, and therefore the petitioners are also entitled to the same relief.
The petitioners further brought to the notice of this Court that under G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (Project Wing) Department, dated 15.04.1986, the condition of one-year limitation prescribed therein cannot be insisted upon, in view of Government Memo No.480-LAR (2)/87-2, dated 24.08.1987, the orders of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.7917 of 2003 dated 16.07.2007, the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.2436 of 2011 dated 08.02.2011 which was confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.14305 of 2011 by order dated 04.07.2011, and also the common judgment of this Court in W.P.(AT) No.174 of 2021 and batch dated 13.12.2022.
5. In fact, the learned counsel for the petitioners also brought to the notice of this Court the observations in W.A.No.356 of 2023. Certain writ petitions, wherein rejection of the cases of the petitioners under was challenged, were allowed, and the appeals preferred therein were disposed of with the following observation: <In this Connection it is respectfully submitted that recently this Court rendered an elaborate Judgment on the subject matter in W.P.(AT) No.174 of 2021 and batch, dated 13.12.2022 by considering all the earlier Judgments passed by APAT and the D.B. of this Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No. 2436 of 2011 which was confirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.14305 of 2011, dated 04.07.2011, directing the Respondents to provide employment to the Petitioners therein by adopting the procedure prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.98, dated 15.04.1986 and also in respect of other candidates, who now remain out of employment. I am also similarly situated and identically placed to the petitioners therein and entitled for appointment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98. Hence, this Writ Petition.=
6. On perusal of the directions of the Division Bench of this Hon’ble High Court in W.P.No.2436 of 2011, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners as per and to pass appropriate orders. The said exercise may be completed within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE D RAMESH 09.04.2026 klk
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 9482/2026
09.04.2026 klk