Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/1111/2026 of Chinta Lokanath Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 22 February 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 1111/2026 Between: 1. CHINTA LOKANATH, S/O NAGAIAH AGED 28 YEARS OCC.
APHC010720692025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 1111/2026
Between:
1. CHINTA LOKANATH, S/O NAGAIAH AGED 28 YEARS
OCC. STUDENT R/O DR.NO.2/558, RAMALAYAM
BACKSIDE DHARMAVARAM, ANANTAPUR
2. B GEETHA, D/O GOVINDA NAIK AGED 30 YEARS OCC.
STUDENT R/O DR.NO.10-149, VEERANAMALA RAMA
KUPPAM, CHITTOOR
3. G VIJAYALAKSHMI, D/O RAMACHANDRUDU AGED 32
YEARS OCC. STUDENT R/O DR. NO.5-56, GOLLA
STREET, RAMALLAKOTA VELDURTHI, KURNOOL
4. E VINOD KHANNA, S/O DEVAPANAM AGED 42 YEARS
OCC.
WORKING
R/O
DR.NO.
10-32,
SEETHARAMAPURAM NELLORE
5. M NAGESWARA NAIK, S/O KRISHNA NAIK AGED 29
YEARS OCC. WORKING R/O DR.NO.9-60, BANDREVU, PEDDAMANDYAM CHITTOOR
6. V VARALAKSHMI, D/O LAKSHMINARASIMHULU AGED
46 YEARS OCC. WORKING R/O DR.NO.12/03, YADIKI, ANANTAPUR
7. B SANGEETHA, D/O PUTA NAIK AGED 25 YEARS OCC.
STUDENT R/O DR.NO.3-44, RAMAPURAM THANDA, VEERANAMALA, CHITTOOR
8. K SUKANYA, D/O RAMAIAH AGED 33 YEARS OCC.
WORKING
R/O
DR.NO.3-31,
SURAIAHGARIPALLI
CHITTOOR
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS
PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY,
SCHOOL
EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,
VELAGAPUDI,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE
COMMISSIONER
OF
SCHOOL
EDUCATION,
VENKATADRI TOWERS, ATMAKUR (M) MANGALAGIRI, AMARAVATI GUNTUR
3. THE
DISTRICT
EDUCATION
OFFICER,
KURNOOL,
KURNOOL DISTRICT
4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT
5. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT
6. THE
DISTRICT
EDUCATION
OFFICER,
NELLORE,
NELLORE DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. PAMARTHY RATHNAKAR
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES III
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION No.1111 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:
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “….to issue an order, writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents in excluding the Petitioners from the final selection list for their respective posts under Mega DSC-2025, despite the Petitioners securing meritorious ranking overall in their respective Vertical / Horizontal reservation categories, having successfully undergone certificate verification as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of the principles of natural Justice, as well as violative of Articles 14, and 16 of the Constitution of India AND FURTHER declare that the action of the Respondents in adjusting/appointing meritorious candidates belonging to Vertical and Horizontal reservation categories against Open Category vacancies, instead of adjusting them against their respective reservation categories, as illegal and contrary to the recruitment rules, G.O. Ms. No. 77 and settled principles governing merit-based selection Consequently, direct the Respondents to re draw the merit list, correctly apply the roster, and re-work the selection strictly on the basis of inter-se merit in accordance with law, by properly adjusting candidates against their respective Vertical and Horizontal reservation categories, and thereafter consider and appoint the Petitioners to their respective posts in the concerned district, with all consequential benefits, including seniority and notional benefits, as may be applicable….”
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
3. Based on the pleadings, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the merit list has been prepared and published and that, insofar as filling up the posts under the reserved categories is concerned, G.O.Ms.No.77, dated 02.08.2023, clearly stipulates the procedure along with illustrations. Hence, the present writ petition is filed seeking implementation of the rule of reservation as per the illustrations mentioned in G.O.Ms.No.77, dated 02.08.2023.
4. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the respondents prepared the selection list and they scrupulously followed the reservation as per G.O.Ms.No.77. He further submitted that they initially prepared the selection list for 20% of the open category based on merit and thereafter, while filling the remaining 80% meant for local candidates, they followed the instructions contained in G.O.Ms.No.77. There was no deviation in preparing the selection list. The writ petition is based merely on apprehension and is pre- mature.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that with regard to the filling up of posts in respect of all other social categories the present writ petition is filed.
6. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioners have approached this Court merely on apprehension. The learned counsel has relied only on the merit list and he has not been able to place any selection list. At present, there is only a merit list and no selection list. While preparing the selection list, the respondents are required to follow the rule of reservation and the instructions issued in G.O.Ms.No.77, dated 02.08.2023. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition is pre-mature.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH
Date: 23.02.2026 Ivd
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION No.1111 of 2026
Dated: 23.02.2026
Ivd