G Devasahayam vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2021 Latest Caselaw 409 AP

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI


     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                            &
                 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR



                        WRIT APPEAL No.336 of 2020

                     (Taken up through video conferencing)

G. Devasahayam, S/o G. Albert,
Aged 54 years, Occ: Technical Officer,
NSJCO and M. Division,
Sattenapalli, Guntur District and others.

                                                           .. Appellants.
        Versus

The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its
Principal Secretary, Water Resources
Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi,
Guntur District and others.

                                                           ..Respondents.

Counsel for the Appellants : Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao

Counsel for respondents 1 to 3 : GP for Irrigation and Command Area

Counsel for respondent No.4 : Mr. S. Jagadish

ORAL JUDGMENT

Dt: 28.01.2021

per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ

Heard Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the appellants.

Also heard learned Government Pleader for Irrigation and Command Area

appearing for respondents No.1 to 3 and Mr. S. Jagadish, learned counsel

for respondent No.4.

2. The present appeal has been presented against the order dated

26.09.2019 in W.P.No.14789 of 2019.

HCJ & CPK, J WA No.336 of 2020

3. While disposing of the application for condonation of delay, this

Court observed as follows:

"Heard Mr. M. Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the

appellants.

Also heard learned Government Pleader for Irrigation and

Command Area appearing for respondents No.1 to 3 and Mr.

S. Jagadish, learned counsel for respondent No.4.

The appellants were respondents No.4 and 5 in the writ

petition. It appears from the order dated 26.09.2019, by

which W.P.No.14789 of 2019 was disposed of, that

respondents No.4 and 5 were not heard. Though the first

page indicates that none appeared for respondents No.4 and

5, the order does not indicate as to whether notice was

served on respondents No.4 and 5 and whether they have not

appeared despite due notice.

It is the version of the appellants in the application for

condonation of delay for filing the connected appeal against

the aforesaid order that no notice was issued to them and the

order was passed accordingly, and only after consequential

order was passed pursuant to the order of this Court the

appellants became aware about the order in the writ petition

and the present appeal has been filed.

We are satisfied that the delay is not intentional or

deliberate, and there is sufficient ground for the delay

occasioned for filing the appeal and accordingly, the delay

stands condoned.

Accordingly, this I.A. is disposed of."

HCJ & CPK, J WA No.336 of 2020

4. It is pointed out by the learned Counsel for the appellants that

pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.14789 of 2019,

consequential order has been passed by the authorities concerned, as a

result of which, the writ petitioner has been placed above the present

appellants in the seniority list.

5. In that view of the matter, we do not propose to entertain the

present writ appeal due to subsequent developments, but at the same time,

we reserve liberty to the appellants to challenge the consequential order

passed by the authorities concerned, in accordance with law.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands disposed of. No costs. As a

sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.

ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J

Nn

HCJ & CPK, J WA No.336 of 2020

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR

WRIT APPEAL No.336 of 2020

(per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)

Dt: 28.01.2021

Nn