WP/7626/2026 of Mulukuri Venkata Reddy Vs The Registrar on 30 March 2026

1. The Registrar, (Administration), High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

2. The Principal District and Sessions Judge, Khammam.

3. K' Trinath, superintendent, v Addr. District Judge, Khammam working on deputation at Prl. District Court, Khammam. -"-

4. K. Sridevi, Superintendent, I Addl. Senior Civil Judge,s Court, Khammam.

5. S. Komali, Superintendent, ll Addl. District Court, Khammam.

6. B. Nagendra Kumar, Superintendent, prl. Junior Civil Judge,s Court, Khammam.

7. R Srinivasa Raju, Superintendent, lll Addl. Junior Civil Judge,s Court, Khammam.

8. Syed Mahamood pasha, superintendent, vr Addr. District court, sathupaili.

9. M. Jyothi, Supl-.rintendent,.prl..Diskict Court, Khammam working on deputation at Prl. Senior Civil Judge's Court,'X-nJmmam.

10. S. Nagamani, Superintendent, lll Addl. District Court, Khammam. 1 1 . K. Surendramani, Superintendent, Senior Civil Judge,s Court, Madhira. 1 2. chunchu Marreswar Rao, superintendent, r Addr. Junior civir Judge,s court, Madhira.

I /l .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of ltvlandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in not considering the genuine claim of the Petitioner for declaration of Probation on the post of Superintendent in pursuance of the Order ROC No.1985/2O24-C1 dt.16.1 .2025 iss;ued by the 1st Respondent and going on making correspondence whether the Graduation Certificate issued by the lndian Army Dt.19.9.2003 consequent on his retirement after completing more than 15 years of services in the Armed Forc,-.s despite of his repeated requests and in spite of Orders from the Honble High Court vide ROC No.1985/2O24-C1 Dt.16.1 .2025 and despite of clarifications issued in the similar issue vide G.O.Ms.No.S7 Home (General.B) Department Dt.13.3.2001 of Government of Andhra Pradesh and proceed to fillup existing vacancies of Senior Superintendents with Petitioners Juniors i.e., R3 to R12 by calling lor Special Confidential Reports, Service Registers and for Oral lnterview on 25.2.2026 vide Letters No.549 Dt.6.2.2O26 and 681 D1.13.0026 issued by the 2nd Respondent, is as highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, improper, colorable exercise of power, opposite to all canons of law, violative to Articles 14, 16, 19,21 and 300-A of Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the case of the Petitioner for declaration of Probation on the post of Superintendent and consider for Promotion to the Post of Senior Superintendent, on par with Petitioners Juniors i.e., R3 to R12 with all consequential benefits such as seniority among R3 to R12 in pursuance of Order ROC No.1985/2024.C1 Dt.16.1 .2025 issued by the 1st Respondent and G.O.Ms.No.S7 Hrrme (General.B) Department Dt.13.2.2001 and in accordance with orders dt.21 ,2.2019 in W.P.No.1980/2019. |.A.NO:1 OF 2026 Petition Un,Jer Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed itt support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 to consider the representation Dt.12.11.2025 to declare the probation of Petitioner on the post of Superintendent and also to call for and 1/ ,r t' consider for Promotion to the Post of Senior Superintendent by suspending the Letters No.549 D1.6.2.2026 and Lr.No.681 Ot.13.2.2026 issued by 3rd Respondent, for Promotion to the Post of Senior Superintendents among R3 to R12, pending disposal of main writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VONJARI RAJA SHEKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : SRI MANOJ REDDY KESHI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 & 12 : - The Court made the following ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR TI{E STATE OF TELANGANA AT I{YDERABAD TI-TI' HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THI] I{ONOURABLB SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA Writ Petition No.7626 of 2026 Dated: 30.03.2026 Between: Mulukuri Venkata ReddY AND The Regir;trar ( Adrni nistration), High Court tbr the State of Telangana, l{yderabad & others. ...Respondents ORDER, (per llon'ble Sri Justicc P.Sam Kosliy) Heurrd Mr.V.Raja Shekar Reddy, learned counsel fbr the petitioner and Mr.Manoj Reddy Kesireddy, learned standing counsel for respondent Nos.l and 2. Perused the record.

2. The instant is the writ petition which has been filed by the petitioner clairning fbr declaration of the probation period on the post of S.rperintendent and thereafter to accept the Graduation Certificate issuecl by lndian Army dated 19.09.2003 and treating ...Petitioner him to be a Graduate, further considering his crairn fbr fiiling up vacancy of Senior Superintendent. 3' The learned counser for the petitio,er subrnits that duri,g the course of trre pendency of the present writ petition before this court, many of his juniors has since been arso promoted and the case of the petitioner has been left out. 4' The respondents seems to have not co,sider.ecr the case of the petitioner for declaring his probation as also fbr further prourotion on the ground that the petitioner does not have a graduation degrce whicrr is one of the minimurn quarification that is required for both confirmation of probation as arso for the next prornotion. 5' The contention of the petitio,er is that admittedry the petitioner had creared his Senior schoor certificate exanrinatio, l'rom the Director of Arrny Education and a cer-tificate in trris regard has been duly issued by the Anny Headquarters on 27.06.2001. He furthel contends that on the basis of the senior Scrroor ceftificate

Examin,ltio' and trre subsequent serving the Indian Arry continuc'usl1'for a period of 15 years in terms of trre office Memora;rdum dated 12.02.19g6 ex-servicemen who are matricurate or ex-se:rvicemen who have obtained Indian Army Speciar certificate of Education or the corresponding certificate with l5 years of service wourd be erigible for appointment to any reserved vacancy in Group - C post where the essential qualification is graduation ancr in the prccess the Graduation certificate was arso issued by the Office of the Indian Army on 19.09. 2003.

6. Trre petitioner arso referred to the G.o.Ms.No.57l2001 dated 13.03.200r issued by the erstwhire Government of Andhra Pradesh deating with the reraxation of educaticnar qualification in respect of e:i-se'vicemen for re-emproyment against the reserved vacancies in the State Governrnent. For r-eady reference, the relevant po,ion of the said G.o.Ms., is being reproduced hereunder: HOME (GEN ERAL.B) DEPARTMENT G O.Ms.No.57 dated 13.03.2001 : : :

i I I

! r. :i .!r _.i1. I i., ...

I . Govt. of India, Ministry of personnel, public Grievances & pensions (Deptt. Of personnel and Trairring) New Delhi, o.M.No.l50 t52/g/g2 Estr (D) dated 12.02.1986.

2. From the Director of Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad Lr.No.2 2)g/gg_F I dated 3 t.0 l. I 99g.

* *:f Government of India in trreir Notification orders were issued r-elaxing the educational qualifications in rcspect of ex-servicemen for their re_employment against rcserved posts in the central Government Department to the categories of Group_C and Group_ D posts, which are Clerical/Accountants etc., i.e, Clerks, Typist, Stenos etc.

2. In the reference second read above, the

ORDER:

ln the reference Director, Sainik Welfare Government to implement first read above, the had lequested the the orders of the Government of India In the State of Andrrra pradesrr relaxing the educationar quarifications in r-espect of ex-seryicemen for their re_employment against reserved posts in the State Government, Government undertakings and local bodies.

3. The Government after careful examination ol'the proposals issue, the following orders.

i) The posts covered under Group-llB, Group- lll and Group-lV which are clerical and equivalent to Group-C and Group-D of Central Services. The minimum general qualifications prescribed for Grcup-C and Group-D posts of Central Services and Gr,rup-[[B and Group-lll of State Services is Degree. Hence all the posts covered under Group-llB and Group-[II and Group-[V has been considered and relzLxed by Educational qualifications in favour of ex- sen,icernen as prescribed the education qualifications of tiovernment of India in the reference first read above, is a follows:- A) For appointrnent to any reserved vacancy in Gro,.rp-C posts a matriculate ex-servicemen (which ternr includes an ex-seruicemen who has obtained the lndian Army Special Certificate of Education or the corrt:sponding Certificate in the Navy or the Air Forc:) who has put in not less than 15 years of Servrce in the Anned Forces of the Union may be considered eligible for appointment of the posts for which the essential educational qualifications prescribed is graduation and where:"

7' Subsequently, learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon an order of the rearned Single Bench of this court in w.P.No.l980 of 20tg which srood decided on 2r.02.2019 whereby under similar circumstances, Iearned singre Bench dealing with G.O.Ms.No.57 of 2001 has held as under: "Learned counser for petitioner submits that the issue 'whether the Graduation certificate issued by the Armed Forces Medicar services is equivarent to I2th class or not, fell for consideration before the Government of India and the same was clarified by the Ministry of Human Resources Development, Govenrment of [ndia, vide letter dated 23.0g.2017, that the Graduation certiricate issued by the Armed Forces is equivalent to l2th class and subsequently, the State Government has arso taken a poricy decision in G'o'Ms'No.57 dared 13.03.200r to the effecr thar some pref'erence should be given in favour of ex_ servicemen while making appointments. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition dirrcti,g the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of clarification issued by the Ministry of Human Resources Development, Govemment of India, vide letter dated 23.0g.20t7

alrd also G.O.Ms.No.57 dated 31.03.2001 for appointment to the post of Village Revenue Officer. Learned Government Pleader appearing for rer;pondents has contended that the case of the petitioner would be considered in tems of clzLrification issued by the Ministry of Human Resources Development, Government of India, vide letrer dated 23.08.2017 and also G.O.Ms.No.57 dated 13.03.2001 and appropriate orders rvould be passed. l'his Couft, having considered the rival submissions, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Village Revenue Officer by duly taking into account the clarification issued by the Ministry of Hunran Resources Development, Government of Indiir, vide letter dated 23.08.2017 and also G.O.Ms.No.57 dated 13.03.2001 and pass appropriate orders within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

8. It is based upon these G.Os., and the order passed by the learned Sinl;le Ilench that petitioner seeks for similar trcatment be extended so that the petitioner's probation can be confirmed as also /

he can be considered for fufther promotion to the post of Senior Superintendent. 9' on the previous date of hearing, Iearned counser for respondent Nos.r and 2hadtaken time to seek instructions in this regard. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, Iearned counsel for respondent Nos.l and 2 submits that the Department is still to take a decision in this regard and the matter is stil pending consideration before the respondents so far as craim of the petitioner is concerned.

10. on a query put to rearned counser for respondent Nos.l and 2, there was no dispute so far as G.o.Ms.No.S7 dated I3.03.2001 being invoked as on date inasmuch as the said G.o has not be superseded by any other G.o., so far as t*ating of ex- servicemen with rnatriculation and r5 years of service being treated as a graduate. There arso was no dispute so far as the respondent Nos.l and 2 having not passe d any orders on the administrative side holding that G.o.Ms.No.57 dated 13.03.200r being nor applicable upon the emproyees of rcspondent Nos.l and 2 -

Establishment. There is arso no order on the judiciar side hording that G.Cr.Ms.No.57 dated r3.03.2001 not being appricabre upon the employees <lf respondent - Estabrishment. tn the absence of anything as such, the onry inference and presumption that can be drawn is that G.o.Ms.No.57 dated 13.03.2001 srands squarery applicabre even on the emproyees working under respondent Nos. r and 2 - Establishmenr. I I. In the given factuar backdrop, there does not seem to be any good reason why trre benefit/reraxation provided in G'o.Ms.No.57 dared 13.03.200r shourd nor be exrendecr ro the petitioner arr;o. The view of this Bench arso gets fortified from an earlier order of the learned single Bench in w.p.No.l9g0 of 2019 decided on21.02.2019. 12' rn'iew of the same, we are incrined to arow the writ petition by setring aside the order passed by respondent No. r dated 26.06.2024 ancr arso direct respondent Nos. r and 2 to immediatery consider the car;e of the petitioner at parwith his immediate junior and consider thc case for confirmation of probation as arso for the I I

...

next promotional post granting him the relaxation that has been extended by G.o.Ms.No.S7 dated r3.03.2001 subject ro rhe petitioner fulfilling all other eligibilities and also on due scrutiny of servlce.

13. Let the entire exercise be considered and executed within a period of 30 days from today. The reason why this Bench is granting a short period of 30 days for irnplementation is the fbct that the petitioner is retiring from service on 31.05.2026 which shows that the petitioner hardly has got around 2 months of service left.

14. Accordingly, this writ petition is ailowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. P. PONNA ISTANT //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER \

To

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7. R.

8.

9.

10. s.

11. K.

13. One

14. One 15 Two SA i I :

\ \. I t I HIGH COURT DATED::3010312026 WP.No.7626 ot 2026 ALLOWING THE W.P HOUT COSTS. =i

?

* oo I a6