WP/29523/2023 of M VEERA SIVA NAGA RAJU Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 5 February 2026

1. M VEERA SIVA NAGA RAJU, S/O. BHASKARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.2-2, KONIKEPUDI VILLAGE, PEDANA MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT - 521366

2. K. APPARAO,, S/O. SURI BABU AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 7-32, RAMAJOGI PALEM, CHAKIPALLI POST, CHOWDAVARAM MANDAL, PRESENT ANAKAPALLI DISTRICT. (OLD VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT)-531036

3. A. SATHEESH KUMAR, A. SATHEESH KUMAR S/O. KANTHI RAJU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O. POSASLAGARUVU VILLAGE, HUKUMPETA MANDAL,

PRESENT ALLURI SEETHARAMARAJU DISTRICT PREVIOUS VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT

4. B. SYAM BABU,, S/O. SUBBA RAO AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O. 3-14, NEELLACHERUVU STREET,

VALLURUPALLI VILLAGE, PENTAPADU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT- 534166

5. M. DURGA PRASAD,, S/O. LAKSHMANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 4-174, MAIN CENTRE, T. NARASAPURAM VILLAGE, MANDAL WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT

...PETITIONER(S)

::2::

AND

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DAIRY DEVELOPMENT AND FISHERIES DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI GUNTUR DISTRICT

2. THE DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, DAIRY DEVELOPMENT AND FISHERIES STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH NTR VSSH CAMPUS, LABBIPET VIJAYAWADA KRISHNA DISTRICT

3. THE DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEE, REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN/DIST. COLLECTOR KRISHNA DISTRICT, AT VIJAYAWADA

4. THE DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEE, REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN/DIST. COLLECTOR WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, AT ELURU

5. THE DISTRICT SELECTION COMMITTEE, REP BY ITS CHAIRMAN/DISTRICT COLLECTOR VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT,

6. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, KRISHNA DISTRICT AT VIJAYAWADA

7. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ELURU

8. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, ANIMAL HUSBANDRY VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT AT VISAKHAPATNAM

...RESPONDENT(S):

::3::

This Court made the following ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioners for the following relief: “to issue a Writ order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring inaction of the respondents herein not considering the petitioner's claim for appointment to the posts of Animal Husbandry Assistant AHA as per the merit obtained in the selection process following the Notification No 1/2020 dated 10012020 as discriminatory, illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequentially the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents herein to consider the petitioner's on par with the candidates in W.P. No. 33537 of 2022 for appointment to the posts of Animal Husbandry Assistants in the existing vacancies in their respective Districts and pass….”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondents.

3. The case of the petitioners is that the 1st petitioner belongs to the BC-B category and is a local candidate of Krishna District, the 2nd petitioner belongs to the SC category and is a local candidate of Visakhapatnam District, the 3rd petitioner belongs to the ST category and is a local candidate of Visakhapatnam District, the 4th petitioner belongs to the SC category and is a local candidate of West Godavari District; and the 5th petitioner belongs to the SC category and is a local candidate of West Godavari District. All the petitioners, after completing their SSC, completed the two-year Intermediate Vocational Course in Dairying

::4::

(Dairy) Science within the relevant period and secured higher cumulative grade points, thereby fulfilling the eligibility criteria prescribed for the post of Animal Husbandry Assistant (AHA). The 1st respondent issued a common Notification No.1/2020 dated 10-01-2020 inviting applications for recruitment to 6,858 posts of Animal Husbandry Assistants in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The said post is a district cadre post and selections were made district-wise. As per the terms of the notification and G.O. Ms. No.110, PR&RD Department, dated 19-07-2019, the selected candidates were to be deployed in the Village Secretariats established in Gram Panchayats. The qualifications prescribed for the said post are as per G.O. Ms. No.26 dated 26-08-2004 and G.O. Ms. No.34 dated 13-09- 2013, which include the Intermediate Vocational Course in Dairying and Poultry Sciences as one of the required qualifications, subject to one-year departmental training to be conducted by the Director of Animal Husbandry as in-service candidates. Accordingly, the petitioners are fully eligible for appointment to the post of Veterinary Assistant, now renamed as Animal Husbandry Assistant. Pursuant to the said notification, the petitioners applied as local candidates from Krishna, Visakhapatnam, and West Godavari Districts, were issued hall tickets, appeared for the written examination, and qualified in the results declared on 27-10-2020. Thereafter, they were called for certificate verification on 08-10-2022, produced their original certificates, and the same were duly verified by the

::5::

competent authorities. However, their claims were not considered for appointment. No written orders or reasons were communicated to them, and they were only orally informed that they did not possess the requisite certificates as on the date of the notification. The certificates were issued belatedly in July 2020 due to COVID-19-related cancellation of examinations, were duly produced at verification, and the petitioners seek no relaxation as they possess the requisite statutory qualifications.

4. It is relevant to state that, in similar circumstances, similarly situated candidates approached this Court in W.P. No.33537 of 2022, and this Court was pleased to direct the 1st respondent to consider their cases for appointment to the post of Animal Husbandry Assistants on par with other selected candidates. Therefore, the inaction of the respondents in not considering the petitioners’ claims for appointment pursuant to Notification No.1/2020 dated 10-01-2020, on par with the candidates covered under W.P. No.33537 of 2022, is illegal and arbitrary.

5. It is further provided in the notification that possession of the prescribed qualifications as on the date of issuance of the notification is mandatory, and it is asserted that the petitioners acquired formal certification only subsequent thereto. However, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents are empowered to extend appropriate relaxation and to duly consider the representations submitted

::6::

by the petitioners, which are presently pending before the competent authorities, in accordance with law.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the considered view that the writ petition can be disposed of, without going into the merits of the case, directing the respondents to consider the petitioners’ cases in accordance with law. It is further directed that, if any similarly situated candidates have been granted benefits pursuant to the same notification, the petitioners shall also be considered on parity. If any vacancies under the said notification are available, the petitioners’ claims shall be duly examined and considered strictly in accordance with the applicable rules, notifications, and Government Orders.

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications if any pending, shall stand closed. ________________________ JUSTICE D. RAMESH Dt:06.02.2026 klk

::7::

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D. RAMESH

WRIT PETITION No.29523 of 2023

Dt:06.02.2026 klk