Wednesday, 10, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Periyala Venugopala Rao vs State Of Ap
2022 Latest Caselaw 1216 AP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1216 AP
Judgement Date : 8 March, 2022

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Periyala Venugopala Rao vs State Of Ap on 8 March, 2022
             HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
                   MAIN CASE: W.P. No. 24917 of 2020


                                PROCEEDING SHEET

SL.     DATE                              ORDER                                      OFFICE
NO.                                                                                   NOTE

08.   08.03.2022   RNT, J

                          Sri J. Sudheer, learned counsel for the
                   petitioners, submits that the petitioners were
                   appointed as Assistant Commercial Tax Officers
                   through direct recruitment in 2001 after being
                   successful in the selection process conducted by
                   APPSC in pursuance of Notification No.10/1999.
                   They joined on 31.01.2001, 08.02.2001 and
                   09.02.2001 respectively.        The petitioners were
                   selected under reserved category (Scheduled
                   Caste category).       During the said process of
                   selection, the State enacted a law dividing the SC
                   category into SC(A), SC(B) and SC(C) and the
                   vacancies were notified in that manner by
                   showing       sub-categories        of      SC      category.
                   However, in the case of E V Chinnaiah;
                   Malamahanadu Registered Society; Mallela
                   Venkata Rao; Kota Samanth v. State of
                   Andhra Pradesh {reported in 2004 LawSuit
                   (SC) 1338}, the Hon'ble Apex Court has declared
                   that   the    Andhra   Pradesh           Scheduled        Caste
                   (Rationalization of Reservation) Act 20 of 2000 as
                   unconstitutional.    Consequently, the services of
                   petitioners No.1 and 2 were terminated and the
                   petitioner No.3 was shifted to Panchayt Raj
                   Department based on new merit list.                        The
                   Hon'ble      Apex   Court,     in        I.A.No.5    in     CA
                   No.6758/2000, dated 25.09.2006, clarified that all
                   appointments made prior to its judgment on the
                   basis of reservation permitted by the legislation
                   which was struck down, shall not be affected,
                                        2



SL.   DATE                             ORDER                             OFFICE
NO.                                                                       NOTE
             and the promotions, if any already granted before
             the said judgment shall also remain unaffected.
             Consequent there upon, the petitioners were
             reinstated in 2006 and all consequential benefits
             were granted treating the period of gap as also
             on duty and were promoted to further post in
             2010.    However, the petitioners were granted
             seniority with effect from the date of their
             reinstatement and not with effect from their
             initial appointment, consequently they are being
             denied the further promotion.
                     In spite of time having been granted to the
             respondents     on various         dates, the    counter

affidavit has not been filed.

On 15.02.2022 it was directed that counter shall be filed by the next date positively, but in spite thereof, on 22.02.2022 further time was requested and today also a request has been made on behalf of respondents for further time to file counter affidavit.

Counter affidavit is considered necessary particularly on the point as to why the petitioners' seniority is considered with effect from the date of their reinstatement as submitted by the petitioners' counsel.

Two weeks further time, as last opportunity, is granted to file counter affidavit, failing which, respondent No.1 shall appear in person before this Court with relevant records to assist the Court on the date fixed.

List on 23.03.2022.

_________ RNT, J Dsr

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter