The High Court · 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 to vacate the interim order daled 20.12.2019 in l.A.No. 1 of 2019 in W.P.No.25550 of

2019. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s K.KIRAN MAYEE Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES I i W.P.NO: 27950 OF 2019 Between: Smt. B.Seethanjali, wife of Sri N.Venkataiah, aged 45 years, Occupation Technical Offlcer, O/o. The Executive Engineer, NSLBC, b and M Division, Kallur, Khammam District, Ryo. H.No.15-1 8-26311, Prashanthi Nagar, Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam, Khammam District SO7OO2. AND ...PET|T|ONER Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, 2. The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, 3. The Superintending Eng]neer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally, 4. The Executive Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Division, Kalluru, Khammam Khammam, Khammam District. Erramanjil, Hyderabad. District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Arlicle 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 any appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a.Writ in the nature of. Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing Proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T.Paily/AB/EC-5/11975 dated O9t12t2O19 reversing the Petitioner from the post of rechnical officer to the post of Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31 lrrigation and CAD (Services l) Department dated 2510412018 i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering subordinate Service Rules, 2018, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC-5/1 197S dated Ogt1212019 issued by the Respondents, consequently direct the respondents to extend all benefits attached to the post of Technical Officer. lA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 to suspend the proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T paily/AB/EC-5/1 197S dated 0911212019 issued by the Respondents, pending disposal of the main writ petition and extend all benefits attached to the post of Technical Officer and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2O2O Between:

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintending Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally,

4. The Executive Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Division, Kalluru, Khammam Khammam, Khammam District. District' ...pETraoNERs/REspoNDENTS AND Smt. B.Seethaniali, wife of Sri N.Venkataiah, aged 45 years, Occupation Technical Officer, O/o. The Executive Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Division, Kallur, Khammam District, R/o. H.No.15-18-26317, Prashanthi Nagar, Khanapuram Haveli, Khammam, Khammam District 507002. ... RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 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 to vacate the interim order daled 18.12.2019 in W-P.No.27950 of 2019. ' c c sel for the Petitioner: SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY sel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-I/ GP FOR SERVICES-II W.P.NO: 27973 OF 2019 Between: Smt. G. Jayamma, Wo. M.Raja, aged 46 years, Occupation- Technical Officer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapalli, Khammam District, Rl/o. H.No.5- 6-97/3, Pakabanda Bazat, Khammam, Khammam District ...PETITIONER AND

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Enamanjil, Hyderabad.

3. T_he Superintending Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally, Khammam, Khammam District. 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 a-. appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a Writ in the ...RESPONDENTS nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing Proceedings bearing No.SE/NSILBC/T.Pally/AB/EC-5/1198S dated Ogl1212O19 reversing the Petitioner from the post of Technical Officer to the post of Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31 lrrigation and CAD (Services l) Department daled 2510412018 i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering Subordinate Servrce Rules, 2018, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC-S/'1198S dated 09112120'19 issued by the Respondents, declare that the petitioner is entitle to continue as Technical Officer, consequently direct the respondents to consequently direct the respondents to extend all benefits attached to the post of Technical Officer. lA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 to suspend the proceedings bearing No.SE/NSLBC/T.Pa||y/AB/EC-5/1198S dated Ogl12l2O19 issued by the Respondents, pending disposal of the main writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Between:

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintending Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally, Khammam, Khammam District. ...PET]TIONERS/RESPONDENTS AND Smt. G. Jayamma, W/o. M.Rala, aged 46 years, Occupation- Technical Officer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapalli, Khammam District, Rt/o. H.No. 5- 6-9713, Pakabanda Bazat, Khammam, Khammam District 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 to vacate the interim order dated 18.12.2019 in W.P.No.27973 of 2019. ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDOY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-U GP FOR SERVICES'II W.P.NO: 279E4OF 2019 Between: V. Srinivasa Rao, S/o. late Surya Narayana, Aged 45 years, Occ- Assislant Technical Officer, Oio. .Superintending Engineer, NSLBC O And M Circle, Tekulapalli, Khammam, Rl/o. H.No. 12-4-312, T.N.G.Os. Colony, Raparthynagar- ll, Khammam, Khammam District. ...'ET.T'ONER AND

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Engineer -in- e hief, lrrigation And CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building,

3. The Superintending Engineer, NSLBC O And M Circle, Takulapally, Erramanjil, Hyderabad. Khammam' Khammam District ...RES'.NDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying. that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Coirrt may be pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a Writ in the nalure of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing impugned proceedings No. SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC.5/1 199 S daled 911212019 to the post Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No. 31 lrrigation And CAD (Services l) Department dated 251O412O18 i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, 2018, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the proceedings No. SE/NSLBC/T.PallylABlEC.5l1199 S dated 911212019, direct the respondents the petitioner is entitle to continue as Assistant Technical Officer, consequently direct the respondents to extend all benefits attached to the post of Assistant Technical Officer including further promotion. lA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 to suspend the proceedings No. SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC.5/1 199-S dated 911212019 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. T lA NO: 1 OF 2o2o Between: Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, 2. The Engineer -in- Chief, Inigation And CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, 3. The Superintending Eng_ineer, NSLBC O And M Circle, Takulapalty, Erramanjil, Hyderabad. Khammam, Khammam District. AND V- Srinivasa Rao, S/o. late Surya Narayana, Aged 45 years, Occ- Assistant Technical Officer, O/o. Superintending Engineer, NSLBC O And M Circle, Tekulapalli, Khammam, R9_, H.No. - 12-4-312, T.N.G.Os. Cotony, Raparthynagar- ll, Khammam, Khammam District. ...PETITIONERS/ RESPONDENTS ...RESPONDENT/ PETITIONER 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 to vacate the interim dated 18.12,2019 in W.P.No27984 of 2019. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: cP FOR SERVTCES-U GP FOR SERVICES-il W.P.NO:612OF 2020 Between: N.Vinod Chaitanya, S/o Late N.G.Srinivas Rao, Age. 41 yearc, Occ. Assistant - O and M Division, Technical Officer, O/o. Executive Engineer, NSLBC, T-ekulapally, Khammam, R/o H.No.16-7-1 9214, Sri Gokula Krishna Nilayam, -Colony, Road No. 10, Gollagudem Road, Rotary Nigar, Madhura Nagar Khammam-507002 ...pETrroNER AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, _ lrrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad-500002 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn), lrrigation and CAD Depahment, Jala Soudha, 3. The Superintending Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Circle, Tekulapally, Erramanzil. Hyderabad- 500082 Khammam-507001 Petition under Arlicle 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 order, Direction or writ, more particularly a writ of certiorari ...RESPONDENTS , 'tft calling for all the connected records in the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide Proc.No.SE/NSLBC/T.PallylABIEC-5112O0S, dated o911212019 reverting the Petitioner as Junior Technical officer from Assistant Technical Officer as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 to suspend the operatlon of the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide Proc.No.SE/NSLBC/T.Pally/AB/EC-5/1200'5, dated Ogh2l2l19 by continuing the Petitioner as Assistant Technical officer, forthwith pending disposal of the writ Petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2020 Between:

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, lrrigation and CADbepartment,-secretariat Bqil-dlngs, Hyderabad-500002. 2. ThE Engineer-in-Chief (Admn), lrrigation and CAD Department, Jala Soudha, Enamanzil, Hyderabad- 500082

3. The Superintehding Engineer, NSLBC, O and M Circle' Tekulapally, Khammam-507001 ...PETITIONERS/RESPON DENTS AND N.Mnod Chaitanya, S/o Late N.G.Srinivas Rao' Age. 41 y9ars, Occ. Assistant Technical Officdr, O/o. Executive Engineer, NSLBC' O and M -D-ivision, Tekulapally, Khammam, R/o H.No.16-7-19214' Sri Gokula Krishna Nilayam' Madhuia Nagar Colony, Road No. 10, Gollagudem Road, Rotary Nagar, Khammam-507002 ...RES'oN,ENT/'ETITI.NER 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 to vacate the interim order dated 09.01.2020 in W.P.No.612 ol 2O2O. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. K.KIRAN MAYEE Counset for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES'I/ GP FOR SERVICES'II , W.P.NO: 623OF 2020 Between: Mohd. Nazeemuddin, S/o Nizamuddin, Age. 47 years, Occ. Assistant Technical Officer, O/o Executive Engineer, QC and I Division No.9, Ramagundem, Rl/o H.No. 12-63, Allipur, Raikal Mandal, Jagitial, Karimnagar- 505460. ...PETITIONER AND 'l. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, . lrrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad-500002 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn) lrrigation and CAD Department, Jala Soudha,

3. The Superintending Engineer, land CAD, IFFC Circle, LMD Colony, Erramanzil, Hyderabad- 500082 Karimnagar -505527 ...RES'.NDENT' 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 an Order, Direction or Writ, more particularly a Writ of Certiorari calling for all the connected records in the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide Proc. No. EstUE 1 /l FFCC/LMD I 201 9-201 2240, dated 1 91 1 21201 I reverting the Petitioner as Junior Technical Officer from Assistant Technical Officer as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and contrary to law. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the atfidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou( may be pleased to suspend the operation of the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide Proc.No.EstVEl/IFFCC/LMD/2019-2012240, daled 1911212Q19 by continuing the Petitioner as Assistant Technical Officer, forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition. IAN :2OF 2020 Between:

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, lrrigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad-500002 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn) lrrigation and CAD Department, Jala Soudha, 3. The Superintending Engineer, I and CAD, IFFC Circle, LMD Colony, Enamanzil, Hyderabad- 500082 Karimnagar -505527 AND ...RESPONDENTS years. occ. Assistant i,ohd. Nazeemuddin, S/o Nizamuddin, Age. ^41 rechnical officer, o/o er."'tiii'6-Endlnedr' -QC hnd I Division No 9' AZ"^:,1's"r1io#,'tiro n.rlo i2:oo' Arrip'i,-n'iui Mandal' Jasitial' Karimnasar- 505460. ...PET|T|oNER 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 to vabate the interim order dated 09 01 2020 in lA No l ot 2O2O in W'P No 623 of 2020 Counsel for the Petitioners: M/s K' KIRAN MAYEE Counsel for the ResponO"ntt' e p FOR SERVICES'I/ GP FOR SERVICES'II - - w.P.NO :1189 oF 2020 Between: A.srinivas Reddy, Son of late Sriranga Re9.dV' aSed 45 vears' Occupation' Assistant Technical oinILiI 5n-frp cir."rg' xoinqs-udem' Khammam District' R/o. H.No. 13-4t16' sJiiiij'Iii' p"ata iinoa Giam Panchavat' Khammam Rural, Khammam Dist. ...PETIT|ONER SecretariatBuildings, Hvderabad' AND 1. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Chief Secretary to Government' ' 2 il;' ilj;i;;;"ii'tfr i"r'r"i gliili-ino cAo Departm ent' Jalasoudha Buildins, 3. The Superintending Engineer and Proiect Administrator' SRLIIP-I' SRLIP Erramaniil, HYderabad Circle, i(othagudem, Khammam ulslncr' ...RES'ONDENTS Petition under Atlicle 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 any appropriate Writ' Order or direction' preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC.,lF.7t2o1g-2ot46.Mdt.gl1t2o20revertingthe Petitioner from the post of Assistant Technical Officer to'the post of Junior TechnicalofficerintermsofG.o.Ms.No.3llrrigationandCAD(Servicesl) Department daled 25tO4t2O1 8 i'e' Telangana lrrigation Engineering Subordinate Service Rules' 20'18, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the reversion Proc No'SE/SRLIP- , 1/KTDM/EC.5/F.712019-20146-M dt.91112020, and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in the present post by extending all the benefits attached to the post of Assistant Technical Officer. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 1 5'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to continue the petitioner in the present post of Assistant Technical Officer with all consequential monetary and other promotional benefits by suspending the impugned orders vide Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-liKTDM/EC.51F.712019-20146-M dt. 9l1l2O2O pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2020 Between:

1. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Chief Secretary to G6irernment, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintending Engineer and Proiect Administrator, SRLIIP-|, SRLIP Circle, Kothagudem, Khammam District. AND ...RESPONDENTS A.Srinivas Reddy, Son of late Sriranga Reddy, aged 45 years, Occupation. Assistant Technical Officer, SRLIP Circle, Kothagudem, Khammam District, Ri/o. H-No. 13-4116, Sainagar ll, Pedda Tanda Giam Panchayat, Khammam Rural, Khammam Dist. ...PETITIONER 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 to vacate the interim order daled.23.O1 .2020 in W. P.No.1 189/2020. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-U GP FOR SERVICES-I| t W.P.NO: '1191 OF 2020 Between: D. Thirupathi Rao, S/o Late D. Nagaiah, Aged 44 years, Occ. Assistant Technical Otficer, O/o. The Superintending Engineer and Prolect Administrator, SRLIP-ll, Khammam, Khammam District, Rl/o.H.No. 5-5-1 89/A and 289, Near Roshaiah Hotel, Mustafanagar, Khammam, Khammam District.

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, AND ...PETITIONER Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building,

3. The Superintending Engineer and Project Administrator, SRLIP-ll, Khammam, Erramanjil, Hyderabad. Khammam District ...REspoNDENTs Petition under Arlicle 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 any appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents. )n issuing Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC.51F.712019-20149-M dt. 9.1.2O2O reverting the Petitioner from the post of Assistant Technical Officer to the post of Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31 lrrigation and CAD (Services l) Department dated 2510412018 i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, 2018, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of lndia by setting aside the reversion Proc.No.SE/SRLIP- 1/KTDM/EC.5/F.712019-20149-M dt. 9.1.2020, and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in the present post by extending all the benefits attached to the post of Assistant TechniCal Officer. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 to continue the petitioner in the present post of Assistant Technical Officer with all consequential monetary and other promotional benefits by suspending the impugned orders vide Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC.slF.7l2O19-20149-M dt. 9.1.2O2O pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. I lA NO: 2 OF 2020 Between:

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad-

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, [rrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building,

3. The Supbrint6nding Engineer and Project Administrator, SRLIP-Il' Khammam, Erramanjil, Hyderabad. Khammam oistrict AND ...RE'P.NDENTS D. Thirupathi Rao, S/o Late D. Nagaiah, Aged 44 yearc, Occ. Assistant Technicdl Officer, O/o. The Superintending Engineer and Project Administrator, SRLIP-Il, Khammam, Khammam District, Fl/o.H.No. 5-5-189/A and 289, Near Roshaiah Hotel, Mustafanagar, Khammam, Khammam District ...PETITIONER Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim orders daled 23-01-2O20 in lA.No.1 of 2020 in W.P. No.1191 of

2020. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SHAIK MADAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-U GP FOR SERVICES-Il W.P.NO: 1215 OF 2020 Between: K.Srinivas Rao, Son of Sri K.Andhraiah, Aged 48 years, Occupation. Assistant Technical Officer, O/o. The Executive Engineer, SRLIP Division No.2, Bhadradri-Kothagudem, Khammani District, R/o.H.No. 10-6-1817, Mamellagudem, Khammam, Khammam District. ...'ET.TIONER AND

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Govemment, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, irrigation and CAD Departmenl, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

3. The Supbrint6nding Engineer, and Project Administrator,. SRLIP-1, SRLIP Circte, Kothagudem, Khammam District.

4. The Executive Engineer, SRLIP DIVISION No.2, Kothagudem, 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 ...RESPONDENTS pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction, preferably a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in issuing Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC .1tF.7 t2O1g-2O144-M dt. gt1t2O2O reverting the Petitioner from the post of Assistant Technical Officer to the post of Junior Technical Officer in terms of G.O.Ms.No.31 lrrigation and CAD (Services l) Department dated 251041201 I i.e. Telangana lrrigation Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, 20'18, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and '16 of the Constitution of India by setting aside the reversion Proc.No.SE/SRLIP- IiKTDM/EC.5/F.712019-20144-M dt. 911l2O2O, and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in the present post by extending all the benefits attached to the post of Assistant Technical Officer. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 to continue the petitioner in the present post of Assistant Technical Officer with all consequential monetary and other promotional benefits by suspending the impugned orders vide Proc.No.SE/SRLIP-1/KTDM/EC.slF.7l2O19-2O144-M dt. 91112020 pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2020 Between:

1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

2. The Engineer-in-Chief, lrrigation and CAD Department, Jalasoudha Building, Erramanjil, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintending Engineer, and Project Administrator, SRLIP-|, SRLIP Circle, Kothagudem, Khammarn District.

4. The Executive Engineer, SRLIP DIVISION No.2, Kothagudem, AND ....RESPONDENTS K.Srinivas Rao, Son of Sri K.Andhraiah, Aged 48 years, Occupation. Assistant Technical Officer, O/o. The Executive Engineer, SRLIP Division No.2, Bhadradri-Kothagudem, Khammam Diskict, Rl/o.H.No. 10-6-18n, Mamellagudem, Khammam, Khammam District. ...,ET,T,ONER I 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 to vacate the interim order Dated.23.01 .2020 in W.p.No.121S]2O2O. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-I/ cp FOR SERVTCES-[ W.P.NO: 5333 OF 2020 Between: Chanda Satyanarayana, S/o. Venkanna, aqed 57 vears. Occ.Govt. Emolovee Rl/o. O/o. The Executive Engineer, eC and-l Divisi6n No.7, Karim Naga'r ' AND ...PET|T|ONER

1. Ihe State of Telangana, Eqp, Uy its Principal Secretary, lrrigation and CAD - Department, Secretariat BuiidinO, Hydera6ad-500002, 2. The Engineer-ln-Chief (Admn), Irrigation and CAD Department, Jala Soudha, 3 The Superintendent Engineer, land CAD, J.C.R.D.L.l.S. Circle, K.b.Colony, _ Chinthagattu, Hanamkohda, Warangal-506001, 4. The Exebutive Engineer, Quality Co-nkol and lnspection, Division No.7 Karim Erramanzil, Hyderabad-500082, - Nagar, 5O50O l. - ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articte 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 order, Direction or writ, more particularly a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents more particularly the action of 3rd Respondent issuing impugned proceedings Order dated 29tOZlO20 vide Proceedings No. sE/JCRDLtS/cA&GUES/A2t2o1gt201361ts reviewing petitioners promotions without having power to review after lapse of nearly ten years by deliberately neglecting to examine suitability of the petitioners qualifiation i.e., Draughtsman civil for promotion and reverting the petitioner from the cadre of Assistant Technical officer to lower cadre of Junior Technical officer as illegal, arbitrary, without authority and against the provisions of law ani also against the principles of naturaljustice and consequently set aside the impugned order dated 2gto2t2o2o vide Proceedings No. sE/JCR Dlls/cAflcuEst9t2o1gt2ot361ts passed by the 3rd Respondent. lA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances steted in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of impugned Proceedings passed by 3rd Respondent Vide file No. SE/JCR DLISiCMGUESlA212019-201361/S dated 2910212020 by alowing the Petitioner to continue in his original cadre of Assistant Technical Officer (Draughtsman Grade-ll) pending disposal of the above Writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2020 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 to extend the interim order daled 1110312020 passed in W.P.No. 5333 of 2020 on the file of this Honourable Court. lA NO: 3 OF 2020 a' 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 to direct the respondents more particularly the 4th respondent herein to grant and release Petitioner's annual grade increment forthwith which is due on 01-03-2020 pending disposal of WP.No. 5333 of 2020 also allow all monetary benefits for which the petitioner is entitled to during his service. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BHANU MURTHY BALA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES-U GP FOR SERVICES'II W.P.NO: 6325OF 2O2O Between: K.Kavi Raja Rao, S/o. K.Raleshwar Rao, Aged about 52 yegrs,_ Occ. Technical Officer, O/o. Executive Engineer, Division No.1-CCH, KC Camp, Hanamkonda, Rl/o. H.No.22-2-55, Deshapet, Near Gpvt High School, warangal-506 oo6 ...PETrroNER AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, lnigation and CAD Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad-500002. 2. The Engineer-in-Chief (Admn), lnigation and CAD Department, Jala Soudha, Erramanzil, Hyderabad- 500082 I

3. The Superintending Engineer, I and CADD, Construction Circle, Hanamkonda. ...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 Order, Direction or Writ, more particularly a Writ of Certiorari calling for all the connected records in the impugned Proceedings of the 3rd Respondent vide Proc. No.SE/CCHES/E3/2020, dated 30.01.2020 wherein the Petitioners date of promotion as Technical Officer has been revised and the consequential Proceedings of the 2nd Respondent vide Proc.No.EE/DlVN1 /CCH/HNK/EC1 l2O2OlEC1 1172, daled 2510212020 wherein the Petitioners pay has been reduced as illegal, improper, uniust, arbitrary and contrary to law. lA NO: 'f OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may ba pleased to the impugned Proceedings in suspend the operation of Proc No.SE/CCH|ES|E3|2O20, dated .3Ol01l2O2O, Proc. No. EE/D IVN 1 /CCH/HNKJE C1 I 2020 I EC1 I 1 7 2, dated 25 lO2l 2020 of the 3rd Respondent and the 2nd Respondent respectively by continuing to pay the Petitioner his earlier scale of pay, forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s K.KIRAN MAYEE Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES ll The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER , a.'C HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BIIEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITIO oF 2019, Ns No. 10 172 OF 2014. 255sO, 27950, 27973 AJ|ID 279A4 6L2. 623, ll 89. 1r91. l2 rs, s333 AND 6325 oF 2020 coMMON ORDER: Since the lis involved in all these Writ Petitions ls one and the same, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.

2. For convenience sake, the facts narrated in Writ Petition No. 25550 of 2Ol9 are taken up for consideration' Proceedings of the 3'd respondent - Rarnit'i"tt"tot- 3. cum-Chief Engineer date d O6 l | '2019 reverting petitioner as Assistant Technical Officer lrom the post of Technical Officer are challenged in this Writ Petition.

4. The facts which are germane for consideration are: Petitioner is stated to have been appointed as Tracer/Technical Assistant in 20O5 based on ITI DM Civil qualihcation and subsequently, was promoted up to the post of Junior Technical Ofhcer in 2007, Assistant Technical Ofhcer in 2009 and Technical Ofhcer in 2014. While so, the 2"d respondent - Engineer-in-Chief (Admn-), Irrigation and CAD Department issued Circular Memo dated 24 'O7 '2017 to the effect that 2 promotions given to Technical Assistants without insisting for qualif-rcation prescribed for the post uide Government Memos dated O1.Ol.2OO8 and 06.08.2016 is against Rules, hence, cancelled thc promotions issued earlier and reverted all such individuals to the post of Technical Assistant after a lapse of ten years and lurther promotion orders were cancelled r,r.ith im mediate e Ifect. Aggrieved by the said Circular Memo dated

24.O7.2017, a group of individuals hled Writ Petition No. 30249 of 2Ol7 wherein this Court granted interim sltspensron on I I .09.20 17 of the Circular Memo and the respective Reversion orders and the said interim order was extended until further orders on 16.lO.2Ol7. While the matter stood thus, the 3'd respondent issued noticc in memo dated, 07.O2.2018 calling f<rr objections; aggrieved bv which and the Circular Memo dated 24.07.2017, petitioner approached this Court in Writ Petition No. 10172 of 2O18. This Court by order dated O2.O4.2O1a granted interim suspension for two weeks. Subsequently, petitioner is stated to have submitted explanation to the notice dated 07.02.2018 on

05.09.2019 and 02.11.2Ol9 stating that as per Rules in vogue, his promot ion liom the post of Technical Assistant was as per G.O.Ms.No. 2466, dated 06.09.1956 and Me mo dated f3.O5.1967 and requested the 3'd respondent to consider his case and rescind the proposed reversion orders. However, without taking the same into consideration and the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court which held reversion after a long period of time bad, passed the impugned order dated

06.11.2019 reverting him to the post of Assistant Technical Officer. Meanwhile, the 1"t respondent issued special Rules in the form of Telangana Irrigation Engineering Subordi.qate Service Rules, 2018 uide G.O.Ms.No. 31, dated 25.04.2O18 with prospective effect. Challenging the said G.O., petitioner along with others filed Writ Petition No. 32503 of 2O18 and the same is pending adjudication. It is stated, in view of the interim suspension of Circular Memo dated 24.O7.2017 in Writ Petition No. 30249 of 2017, petitioner was continuing in the post as Technical Officer until the impugned proceedings were passed and now the 3'd respondent cannot take shelter of a suspended memo and issue the impugned proceedings. Petitioner states that G.O.Ms.No. 2466, dated

06.09.1956 clearly recognizes a pass in draughtsmanship (civil) course under the revised syllabus introduced from July 1952 as sufficient qualihcation for appointment as Draughtsman II 4 (.lunior Technical Officer), Draughtsman III (Assistant Technical Officer) when LCtr zrre not available and the said G.O. was further clarilled uide Memo dated 13.05.1967. Circular Memo daLed 24 .O7 .2O 17 rcfers lo a clarification issued by Lhe Government in Memo dated O 1 .O 1 .2008 wherein Technical Assistant (Traccrs) who put in not less than ten years experience rn the cadre of Tracer can be promoted to the cate€lorv of .Iunior Technical Officer (DM GT.III) without insisling for qualilications for tlre post. In view of the same and also in view of subsistence of G.O.Ms.No . 2466, aated OO.OS.1SSO, impugned ordcr is liable to the set aside. According to pt:titioncr, insistencc lor ten years of service in the said Memo derted O I .O 1.2()08 applies only to those who do not have the requisitc qr-rzr li fic:zrtion for promotion to Junior Technical Officer and it docs not apply to them as ITI DM(Civii) has been recognized as sufflcient qualification as per G.O.Ms.No. 2466. Thc contention of petitioner is that in Roads and Brrildings and Panchayat Raj Departments, Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, ITI DM (Civil) qualification is in<:luded against the posts of Junior Technical Officer, Assistant Ter:hnical Ofllccr, Te<:hnical Ofhcer and only three years of 5 service is prescribed for promotion to JTO from the cadre of Technical Assistant

5. This Court, while issuing rule nisi, by order dated

20.12.2019, suspended the impugned reversion order dated

06. 11.2019 as the said proceedings, if given effect to, petitioner would be reverted by two stages which amounts to double rcverslon

6. The 3'd respondent filed counter stating that petitioner was appointed as Technical Assistant on 07.04.2005 on displaced persons quota with SSC, ITI DM Civil qualification; further promoted as JTO (DM III) without completing required service of ten years on 13.O9.2OO7; as DM II (Assistant Technical Ofhcer) on 18.08.2009 and subsequently, as DM I (Technical Officer) ot 29.11.2014 by the 3'd respondent. As per the Circular dated 24.O7.2017, the said promotions are irregular, hence, it was informed that as per APESS Rules, Government Circular Memo dated O I .O I .2008 and Government Memo dated 06.08.2016, the Technical Assistant who put in not less than ten years of experience in the cadre of Tracer can be promoted to the category of JTO without insisting for qualification prescribed for the said post. Further, the 2ncr respondent issued instructions regarding promotion from 6 Tcchnical Assistant to JTO, JTO and ATO and TO who were promoted fnrm Technrcal Assistant to JTO and further promoted to the post of ATO/TO without acquiring requisite qualification / service as per Rules by revising the date of promotion. It is made clear that as per Rule, Technical Assislant with ITI qualification has to be promoted to the post of JTO after completion of ten yczrrs of service as Technical Assistant and with the qualilication of Diploma after completion of three years. In this rr:gard, this olflce issued notice to petitioner dated

07.O2.2018, but the latter did not submit any objections Therefore, another memo dated 29.O3.2OI8 was issued The 2nct respondent conducted meeting on

24.lO.2Ol9 and issued instructions to the effect that Technical Assistants $ho put in not less than ten years of experience in the said cadre czrn be promoted to the cadre of JTO wilhout insisting for qualifications prescribed and who completed the minimum service prescribed in State and Subordinate Service Rules can also be promoted to the said post without insisting for ten years experiencc. Following the same, the 3'd respondent reverted pctitioncr from TO to ATO. 7 l,earnt:d counseI for petitioner Ms. Kiranmayee submits that thc Hon'ble APAT ip a batch of Originat 7 Applications i.e. O.A.No. 6425 of 1995, categorically held that ITI is one of the qualifications prescribed for the post of Civil Draughtsman Gr.lll (Jr. TO); as no separate qualihcation is prescribed for Gr.ll or Gr.I DM (now, ATO & TO), it follows that DM Gr.lll with qualihcation of ITI can go right up to DM Gr.I (TO) without having to posses any further or special qualification. The said judgment was conhrmed by a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 15525 of 2022 on which no Special Leave Petition was preferred by the State, therefore, the judgment of the Tribunal attained finality. Accordin! to learned counsel, in the light of the A.P. Engineering Subordinate Service Rulcs, 1953, GO.Ms.No. 2466, dated O6.09.1956 and the judgment of the Hon'ble APAT in O.A.No. 6425 of 1995 and batch, ITI (Civil) is the requisite qualihcation for the posts of JTO, ATO and TO, therefore, the impugrred order is liable to be set aside. She contends that minimum Qualifying service of ten years or possessing Diploma in Civil / Electrical/ Mech. trngineering that respondents have contended to be compulsory for promotion to the post of JTO from Technical Assistant are not aplicable to a person who possesses ITI (civil), as stated supra. t o 8 Learned counsel contends that the settled seniority cannot be unsettled at this length of time ln this context, she places rcliance on thc judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in G.S.La n-ba u. (Jnion oJ Indial. She also relied on the judgment of thc Hon'ble Apex Court in Rolm Sarup u' State of Haryana2, KushesuLrarrtath Pandeg v. State of Blhanr ' H'C' Puttasuamg u. Hon'ble Chief Justice of Karz.otaka High Court, Bangalor*, Bagauathi Prasad a' Delhi State Mineral Deoelopment Corporations. According to learned counsel, all the rn-rpugned proceedings are consequintial proceedings o[ Circulzrr Me mo dated 24.07 '2017 which was suspended bv this Court in Writ Petition No. 30249 of 2017 uide order datecl 11 .O9.2017 , therefore, reversion proceedings would be illegal and u'ould l-r()t have any legs to stand' Per conlra, learned Government Pleaders for 8. Scrvices - I and II, reiterating the averments in the counter, submit that tmpugrlecl reversion order was passed in accordance rvith thc service rules, hence, no exception can be taken to the same. The Writ Petition is therefore, liable to be dismissed. They relied on the judgment of the Division Bench of ' 1 ros3fzTct oo.r ' AIR l97E s(' l: 16 '20ri(to) sCAl-t.217 o AtR l99t sc lsi t nlR lgqo s( ir l I this Court in A.P.S.R.?.C. u. M. Venkatesuar Reddg1 wherein it was held that for promotion to the post of Divisional Manager, three years service as Deputy Manager is one of the essential qualihcations and Selection Committee cannot ignore this and appoint candidates who do not possess prescribed service. They also relied on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Fuljit Kaur u. Sta'te of PunjabT and Rashi Manl Mishra v. State of U.P.8

9. Having heard learned counsel on either side gnd having perused the material on record, it is evident, principal contention of petitioner is that requisite qualifrcation / service as required by respondents through the impugned order is not necessary for promotion from Technical Assistalt to next higher posts, whereas respondents contend that petitioner was promoted without possessing Diploma in Civil/ Mech Engineering. From the post of Technical Assistant to JTO, hence, he is required to put up ten years of service, however, as he did not comply with the said norm, his subsequent promotions also does not hold good. " 2ooi(4) ALD 20r (DB) ' (2010) ll scc 455 t (:02 r) rz scc tgs 10

10. In this lactual backdrop, it is to be noted that A.P. Engineering Subordinate Service Rules, 1953 (Madras Engineering Suborclinale Service Rules) govern the service conditions. Rule 2(4) prescribes the criteria for appointment / promotion to the post of TO, JTO, ATO (earlier Draughtsman Gr. I, II and III). Rule 2(6) prescribes the criteria for appointment / promotion lr) the post of Te chnical Assistant (earlier Tracer). Schedule Referred to in Rule 6 prescribes the qualification required to the post ol TO, ATO, JTO and Tracer. The Proviso also states that qualification specified shall not be necessary for appointment as Civil Draughtsman Gr.lll in case of Tracers with not less than ten -vears experience as Tracers. G.O.Ms.No. 2466, datcd 06.09.1956 was issued recognizing a pass in Draughtsm:rn ship course as sufficicnt for appointment to the post of Dr.Gr.lll (now JTO).The said G.O. was further clarihed in Memo dated 13.05.1967 to the effect that candidates who passed DM(Civil) Course of thc revised syllabus introduced in July, 1952 can be appointed if diploma holders are not available and this docs not aclmit of the interpretation that such of those appointed should bt: ousted as and n,hen diploma holclers become available. '1'he Elovernment further direct that as in the case supra, who evt:r serviccs are regularised after appointment, despite the fact that degrcc holders become available at later date, the services of candidates possessing the DM (Civil) qualification of the revised syllabus introduced from July, 1952 should also be regulansed despite the fact that LCE holders become available at later date. Further, Circular Memo dated 24.O7 .2017 also refers to a clarification issued by the Government in Memo dated O 1 .0 1 .2008 wherein Technical Assistant (Tracer) who put in not less than ten years experience in the cadre of Tracer, can be promoted to the category of JTO without insisting for qualifications prescribed therefor. 1 l. Further, the Hon'ble APAT in O.A.No. 6425 of 1995 and batch, categorically held that ITI is one of the qualihcations prescribed for the post of Civil Dr.Gr.III (now JTO). The said judgment also categorically held that as no separate qualilication is prescribed lor Gr.II or Gr.l DM (now ATO &TO), it follows that a DM Gr.lll with a qualihcation of ITI can go right up to DM Gr.l (now TO) without having to possess any further or special qualification. The said judgment was conhrmed by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 15525 of 2OO2 and no SLP was preferred by the State thereagainst which means the judgment of the Tribunal attained linality' Here, it is also to be seen that Circular Memo issued by the 2"d respondent d,ated. 24.07.2O17 cancelling the promotions given to Technical { 2 Assistants without insisting for qualifications prescribed for the post uide Government Memo dated O 1.O l -2008 and Government Mcmo dated 06.08.20 16 is against rules and reverting all such individuals, was challenged in Writ Petition No. 30249 of 20167 w-herein the order of interim suspension was granted until further orders. However, respondents without taking steps to vacate the interim order, passed the impugned order dated 06r.l1.20lg reverting petitioncr lrom tht: post o[ TO to ATO. Moreover, Telangana Irrigation Engincering Subordinate Service Rules. 20la issued uide G.O.Ms.No. 31, a^tea

25.O4 .2O18 u'hich prescribes eligibility criteria, was challenged in Writ Petitior.r No. 32503 of 2O 18 and the same is pending adjudication. Normally, an Ofhce Memorandum / Government Order cannot have a retrospective effect unless and until there is an express provision to make its effect rctrospective or [hat the operation thereof is retrospective by necessarf implication. Admittedly, G.().Ms.No.31 was given effect to from the date of its publication in the Ofhcial Gazette, hcnce, it cannot have retrospective effect on the promotions affected earlier thereto. Here, it is also to be observed that in view of the interim suspension of Circular Memo dated 24.O7.2017 in Writ Petition No. 30249 ol 2017 , petitioner was continuing in the post of Technical Offic:er until the impugned proceedings were passed and now the 3rd respondent cannot take shelter of a suspended memo and issue the impugned proceedings. In this view of the matter, this Court cannot find favour with the contentions of learned Government Pleaders.

12. Coming legal pronouncements, ln Kusheswdrnath Pandeg's c@se (supra), the Honble Supreme Court held that employee's promotion cannot be cancelled after a long tenure such as that of 11 years. In Rcm Sarup's case (supra), the Apex Court while dealing with the legality of- an order of reversion of promotion for lacking minimum qualihcations at the time of employment, held the same as i1legal. ln H.C.Puttaswa ntg's case , the Hon'ble Apex Court held that employees who have served for over ten years ald have received higher posts by working hard during service, their services cannot be dismissed for lack of qualifications at such uathi Pra.so,d's ccse. the Hon'ble belated stage. Supreme Court held that lack o[ qualihcation at the time of InB appointment must not be factored as a ground for prohibiting promotion. It is also established position that settled seniority cannot be unsettled at this length of time. In view of the above, it can be said that reversions after such a long time especially I t4 when petitione r's servlce was regularised in each cadre is unsustainable.

13. In the light of the discussion held supra, this Court is of the opinion that the case of respondents does not stand to scrutiny. In vieu, of the conclusion arrived at by this Court, the judgments rclied on by learned Government Pleaders arc not applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case, hence, they are not taken into consideration. t4 Writ Petition No- 2555O of 2019 is accordingly, allowed, setting aside the proceedings o[ the 3.1 respondent dated O6.11,2019. No costs WRIT PETITIONS No. lOl72 of 2OL8 27950 27973 27944 of 2019,612, 623, llag, 1191, 1215, 5333 and 6325 of 2020

15. Ileard Ms, K. Kiranmayee, T. Surlhakar Redcly, .Sri Sri Shaik Madar, Sri Bhanu Murthy Bala, learnecl counsel for petitioners and learned Government Plead'ers for Serviccs I and II.

16. F or the rezrsons stated in Writ Petition No. 2555O of 2O 19, all thesc Writ Petitions are also allowed, duh, setting aside the orders impugned- No costs. i-- l5 t7. Consequently, the misce flaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed. That Rule Nisi has been made absolute as above' Witness THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE' on this FBI94Y' iiii rwrlrw eTGHTH DAY oF FEBRUARY Two rHousAND AND TwENw FlvE Sd/. MOHD. ISMAIL ASSISTAN REGTSTRAR //TRUE COPY// SE N OFFICER To of Telanoana. Khamril,arn, Khammam District' Erramaizil, Hyderabad - 500 082'

1. The Principal Secretary to Government, lrrigation and CAD Department' ' i;il;;J5;;r-etaiiitinvoerauad, State oir-elansana - 500 022' z ifili'ii,ljiiirEi-irrcni"i'tA6r"ir"igition and cAD,-Department Jala soudha, 3. i#ffiffiidtrli;i;u; cniei insineer, sRSP, LMD.colonv' Karimnasar' ;. iil ehi;i $tiiirrv to cori..tni s'"iretariat Buildinss,-Hyderabad, State 5 ii,;H;"";i;i;ndins Ensineer, NSLBC, o and M Circle' Tekulapallvq'' o iiiE'Eilii,ilvi Ensinier, NSLBC, o and M Division' Kalluru' Khammam Z fn"e'Srp"tintending Engineer' I and CAD, IFFC Circle' LMD Colony' a, iilj'H,liE",i"tJiiin-g Engine"r and proiecr Administraror, sRLllP-|, SRLIP - f. iti;'5ii;;iBniing'engineetlnd Project Administrator' sRLIP-ll' Khammam' I o. iiiE'EiLi,jtrJEnsine"r., sRLIP DlvlsloN No 2' Kothloudem' 11.The superintendent engintei, r ,-',i,i cAD, J C Cnintnigattu, Hanamko-nda, Warangal-506001' rz.inJ'eie-cu-tlG Engineer, o,irritv co"niioj and lnspection, Division No.7 Karim Circle, kothagudem, Khammam District' -c.Or.t.sl circle, K.c.colony, Karimnaoar -505527 Khammam District District. Naoar. 505001. iiiZtC iJ tr,tts. K.v. RAJASRE E, Advocate tgry.ql, 5n; cc i6 iviii. k.rtanu MAYEE, Advocate toPUCl- -- ffi dd i;5ir] i.sUrjHexan neooY, Adv^oaateIoPUcl 5; cc io Sni sHntr MADAR, Advocate toPucl -- -..^ il; dd 6 Siii BHANU MaRTHY BALA, Advoc.ate.[oP^UC] . - . i;; dd.'i"-cilcin SEnvrces_r, Hisn court for the State of Telansana, at Hvderabad. [OUT] iii'ct-io 6-plon sERVIcES-ll, High court for the state of relangana' at Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CD CoPies 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 4 5 6 7I 9 1 20 PSK. HIGH COURT NBK,J DATED:2810212025 COMMON ORDER WP.Nos. 1 0 172 of 2018,25550,27950,27973 AND 27984 0F 2019,612,623,1189,1 191,1215,5333 AND 6325 0F 2020 1 H c S 14 -e e o ( ,J O6 ilAfl W ? * a €s * f'rqT c eO (\( f ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITIONS WITHOUT COSTS L, V