Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/5303/2026 of P RAHUL GLIFTAN Vs THE STATE OF AP on 23 February 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 5303/2026 Between: 1. P RAHUL GLIFTAN, S/O. P.STALIN (LATE), AGED ABOUT 30,
APHC010092692026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 5303/2026
Between:
1. P RAHUL GLIFTAN, S/O. P.STALIN (LATE), AGED ABOUT 30, D.NO.36-17-996, 2ND LANE, NIRUPEDALA COLONY, OPP.
MASZID, VENGAIAH NAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522002 .
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HEALTH, MEDICAL AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS,
A.P.SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI,
GUNTUR
DISTRICT- 522237
2. THE DIRECTORATE OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, OLD GOVT
GENERAL HOSPITAL, HANUMANPET VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA
DISTRICT- 520003
3. THE
COLLECTOR
AND
DISTRICT
MAGISTRATE,
GUNTUR,
GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522004
4. THE SUPERINTENDENT, GOVERNMENT GENERAL HOSPITAL, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522001
...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 to issue order, direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not considering the petitioners case for appointment on compassionate ground in spite of the recommendations made by the 4th respondent vide proceedings in Rc.No.5074/E1/2016 dated .02.2025 and also not settled the death cum retiral benefits of petitioners Sri P.Stalin (Late) is illegal, irregular, discrimination and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequential direct the 3rd respondent to 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 3rd respondent to pass appropriate orders for appointment on compassionate ground in pursuance of the recommendations made by the 4th respondent vide proceedings in Rc.No.5074/E1/2016 dated .02.2025 in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
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, direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not considering the petitioners case for appointment on compassionate ground in spite of the recommendations made by the 4th respondent vide proceedings in Rc.No.5074/E1/2016 dated .02.2025 and also not settled the death cum retiral benefits of petitioners Sri P.Stalin (Late) is illegal, irregular, discrimination and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequential direct the 3rd respondent to pass.…”
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner is the son of deceased employee. On demise of his father, the petitioner made an application to consider the case of the petitioner under compassionate appointment to the 4th respondent. On receipt of the same, the 4th respondent has forwarded the said application vide communication dated 08.02.2025 to the 3rd respondent. Despite lapse of one year, the 3rd respondent has not considered and passed any orders. Hence the present Writ Petition.
4. Considering the submissions and without going into the merits of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents more particularly 3rd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner which was forwarded by the 4th respondent dated February, 2025 and pass appropriate orders based on the record, within a period of two (02) months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH
Date: 24.02.2026 M K K
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION No.5303 of 2026
Dated: 24.02.2026
M K K