Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/28939/2025 of SMT. Y JYOTHI Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 17 February 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH WRIT PETITION NO: 28939/2025 Between: 1. SMT. Y JYOTHI, W/O. LATE SMT. BENNA SWAMI,
APHC010552452025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH
WRIT PETITION NO: 28939/2025
Between:
1. SMT. Y JYOTHI, W/O. LATE SMT. BENNA SWAMI, AGED ABOUT
YEARS,
OCC
FIELD
ASSISTANT,
R/O.
AGENCY
LAKSHMIPURAM GRAM PANCHAYAT, GOLUGONDA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT RAJ AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT,
SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS,
AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH.
3. THE
COMMISSIONER,
PANCHAYAT
RAJ
AND
RURAL
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH, TADEPALLI, ANDHRA PRADESH.
4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MGNREGS, GOLUGONDA MANDAL, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH.
5. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, DISTRICT WATER MANAGEMENT
AGENCY, ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.
6. THE ASSITANT PROJECT OFFICER M AND E, DISTRICT WATER
MANGEMENT AGENCY (DWMA) ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT, ANDHRA
PRADESH.
...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 a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the in action of the 5th respondent in not passing any orders on the explanation submitted to the 5rd respondent dated 16.05.2025
to
the
impugned
order
vide
proceedings
no.
40/2025/DVC/GLG/B4/16th dated 30.06.2025 is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the impugned order vide proceedings no. 40/2025/DVC/GLG/B4/16 dated 30.06.2025 forthwith and pass 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 may be pleased to suspend the operation of impugned order vide proceedings no. 40/2025/DVC/GLG/B4/16th dated 30.06.2025, pending disposal of the main Writ petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. P NANILU NAIDU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. R PADMA REKHA (SPL C MGNREGS)
2. GP FOR SERVICES I
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:
The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “….to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the in action of the 5th respondent in not passing any orders on the explanation submitted to the 5rd respondent dated 16.05.2025 to the impugned order vide proceedings no. 40/2025/DVC/GLG/B4/16th dated 30.06.2025 is illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently Set a side the impugned order vide proceedings no. 40/2025/DVC/GLG/B4/16 dated 30.06.2025 forthwith and pass….”
2. Heard Mr. P.Nanilu Naidu, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
3. The Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the orders dated 30.6.2025 of respondent no.5 wherein the petitioner was terminated from service. As against the same, the petitioner has also preferred an appeal on 28.7.2025 before respondent no.2 who is the appellate authority and the same is pending.
4. Learned Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the petitioner preferred appeal against the orders of respondent no.5 before respondent no.2 and it is pending.
5. As the statutory appeal is pending, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition. The respondent no.2 is directed to consider the appeal filed by the petitioner on 28.7.2025 and pass appropriate orders basing on the records available, if required by providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. The exercise shall be completed within a period of three (03) months from today.
6. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH
Date: 18.02.2026 RD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH
WRIT PETITION No.28939 of 2025 Dated: 18.02.2026 RD