WA/1359/2025 of JAKKAM SRINIVASULU Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 12 March 2026

1. JAKKAM SRINIVASULU, S/O. LATE RAJU, AGE 55 YEARS, OCC FOREST BEAT OFIFCER, O/O. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (PROJECT TIGER), GIDDALUR, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

...APPELLANT AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

2. THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, ARANYA BHAVAN, MANGALAGIRI, ANDHRA PRADESH,

3. THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST, PRAKASAM DIVISION AT ONGOLE, DISTRICT FOREST OFFICE, TERRITORIAL DIVISION, SANKSHEMA COMPLEX, SOUTH BYPASS ROAD, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-523 001.

...RESPONDENT(S):

IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 grant leave to the petitioner/appellant to permit him to file additional set of material papers as Ex-A9 to Ex-A11 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 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 condone the delay of 16 days in filing instant Writ Appeal against the interim order dt.18-09-2025 of the learned single judge passed in WP No.24637 of 2025 and pass s IA NO: 3 OF 2025 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 Counsel for the Appellant:

1. Mr. Peeta Raman, Advocate for Appellant. Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. Mr. G. Raju, learned Government Pleader For Services I for respondents.

The Court made the following Judgment: [per Hon’ble Mrs.Justice Lisa Gill]

Prayer in this appeal is for setting aside Interlocutory order dated 18.09.2025 passed by learned Single Bench in W.P.No.24637 of 2025.

2. Aforesaid writ petition has been filed for declaring action of 3rd respondent in not considering petitioner’s (present appellant) candidature for promotion to the post of Forest Section Officer despite the said petitioner being fully eligible for the said promotion. It is also prayed that 3rd respondent be directed to take affirmative steps to consider petitioner’s candidature for promotion as sought.

3. Learned Single Bench on considering the matter, observed that detailed hearing is required and posted the matter to 16.10.2025. In the meanwhile, respondent authorities were directed to keep one post in the cadre of Forest Section Officer reserved for the petitioner, pending disposal of the writ petition. Respondents were entitled to make ad-hoc arrangements to meet the exigencies of service in the said post subject to outcome of the said writ petition. Aggrieved therefrom, present writ appeal has been filed.

4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that a direction should have been given by the learned Single Bench for promoting the appellant/petitioner as per his seniority without reference to the fact that criminal trial is pending besides pendency of disciplinary proceedings as appellant is seeking promotion to a non-selection post. Direction should thus have been issued, at the very outset itself, in view of Rule 5 of A.P. State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996.

5. Learned counsel for respondent has opposed this appeal while submitted that such a direction would amount to allowing the writ petition by way of an interim order. Dismissal of appeal is sought.

6. Having heard learned counsel for parties, we do not find any ground to cause interference at this stage in this writ appeal, challenging interlocutory order, dated 18.09.2025. One post of Forest Section Officer has already been directed to be kept reserved pending disposal of writ petition with liberty to respondents to make only ad-hoc arrangements and that too subject to decision of the writ petition. Learned counsel for appellant is unable to deny that all the pleas and arguments as are being raised in this appeal in fact form the subject matter of the writ petition in question and are well within the realm of consideration by learned Single Bench. In our considered opinion it is not appropriate to delve upon and adjudicate upon the said issues at this stage in present proceedings. Learned counsel for appellant is unable to point out any illegality, infirmity or irregularity which calls for interference in this writ appeal.

7. It is brought to our notice that subsequently, Writ Petition Nos.19007, 21110 & 22997 of 2024 were listed, along with the present writ appeal.

8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances above, this writ appeal is dismissed. W.P.No.24637 of 2025 as well as the aforesaid writ petitions tagged along-with be placed before the learned Single Bench, as per roster, for decision on merits. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed accordingly.

__________________

LISA GILL, JUDGE

___________________________

NINALA JAYASURYA, JUDGE

Date:13.03.2026 MJA

THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE LISA GILL THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

WRIT APPEAL NO: 1359/2025 [per Hon’ble Ms.Justice Lisa Gill]

Date:13.03.2026 MJA