Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/9041/2026 of MAJJARI SREERAM KUMAR Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 7 April 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 9041/2026 Between: 1. MAJJARI SREERAM KUMAR, S/O. M.SREERAMULU, AGED ABOUT
APHC010164842026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 9041/2026
Between:
1. MAJJARI SREERAM KUMAR, S/O. M.SREERAMULU, AGED
ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC. UN-EMPLOYEE,R/O SRIKRISHNA
DEVARAYA NAGAR SAIPETA, KADAPA CORPORATION,
KADAPA DISTRICT.
2. KORIGAM RAVI,, S/O KORIGAM GURAVAIAH, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
OCC.UN-EMPLOYEE,
R/O
CHENNAMPALLI VILLAGE AND POST BADVEL MANDAL,
KADAPA DISTRICT.
3. KORIGAM GANGADEVI,, D/O KORIGAM POLAIAH, AGED
ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC. UN-EMPLOYEE, R/O D.NO. 3-3- 229, KAPU STREET, NEAR SATHAMMA TEMPLE, BESTHAVEEDHI, BADVEL, KADAPA DISTRICT.
4. KORIGAM SAVITHRI,, D/O LATE KORIGAM GANGULAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC. UN-EMPLOYEE, R/O
PRABHALAVEEDU VILLAGE AND POST, B.KODUR
MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT.
5. KURAKU NEERAJA,, D/O. KURAKU PEDDA VENKATAIAH, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC.UN-EMPLOYEE, R/O D.NO.
81/306,
PALEMPALLI
VILLAGE
ANDPOST
KADAPA
CORPRATION, KADAPA DISTRICT.
6. KORIGAM POLAIAH,, S/O KORIGAM KAMMAIAH, AGED
ABOUT
YEARS,
OCC.UN-EMPLOYEE,
R/O
CHENNAMPALLI VILLAGE AND POST BADVEL MANDAL,
KADAPA DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
WATER
RESOURCES
DEPARTMENT,A.P.,
SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.522503
2. THE
DISTRICT
COLLECTOR/
CHAIRMAN,
DISTRICT
SELECTION COMMITTEE, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.516001
I
3. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, NTR TELUGU GANGA
PROJECT CIRCLE KADAPA, YSR DISTRICT.516001
...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 by declaring the action of the respondents herein in not considering the petitioners claim for employment if any suitable posts under displaced quota as per the guidelines issued under G.O.Ms.No.98
Irrigation, (PROJ.Wing) Department dated 15-4-1986 and consequential Memo.No.480-LAR (2)87/2, dated 24-8-1987 as highly illegal, arbitrary, discrimination and also in violation of Article 14,16 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequential the Hon'ble High court may pleased to direct the respondents herein to consider the petitioners claim for employment in any suitable posts under displaced quota as per the guidelines issued under G.O.Ms.No.98
Irrigation, (PROJ.Wing) Department dated 15-4-1986 for providing employment and consequential Memo.No.480-LAR (2)87/2-, dated 24-8-1987 by preparing a seniority list and may 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 Pleased to direct the respondents herein to consider the petitioners claim for employment in any suitable posts under displaced quota as per the guidelines issued under G.O.Ms.No.98 Irrigation, (PROJ.Wing) Department dated 15- 4-1986 and consequential Memo.No.480-l-AR (2)87/2-, dated 24-8- 1987, pending, disposal of the writ petition and may pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. M R TAGORE
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES II
The Court made the following:
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 a Writ, Order or Orders or directions more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the petitioners’ claim for employment in any suitable posts under displaced quota as per the guidelines issued under G.O.Ms.N0.98, dated 15.04.1986 and in violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to include the name of the petitioners in the seniority list for Displaced Persons quota/employment and thereby to provide employment as per G.O.Ms.N0.98, dated 15.04.1986 in any suitable post with all consequential benefits and pass…”
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. 4 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. 4. 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 G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (Project Wing) Department, dated 15.04.1986, 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. The petitioners are also similarly situated and identically placed therein are entitled for appointment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.98. Hence, this Writ Petition.”
5. 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 for appointment as per G.O.Ms.No.98, Irrigation (Project Wing) Department, dated 15.04.1986 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. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH
Date:08.04.2026 GK
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO:9041 of 2026
Dated:08.04.2026
GK