C. GOPALA GUPTA v. PRL. SECY., COOP. SOCIETY & 4 ORS.
WP/24031/2017 · 2026-04-22
Maheswara Rao Kuncheam
body2017
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2017 DAILYLAW 942 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2017 DAILYLAW 942 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010109292017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 24031/2017 Between:
1. C. GOPALA GUPTA, S/O. LATE C. RAMA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, OCC: RETIRED, R/O. 12-3-387 A, JESUS NAGAR, FIRST CROSS, ANANTAPUR., ANDHRA PRADESH - 515001
...PETITIONER AND
1. PRL SECY COOP SOCIETY 4 ORS, SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF A.P. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, A.P.SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, A.P.STATE.
2. THE REGISTRAR, ANDHRAPRADESH CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, HYDERABAD.
3. THE ANANTAPUR DISTRICT COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK, REP., BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER & C.E.0, SUBASH ROAD, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.
4. THE BOARD OF MANAGEMENT, DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK, REP., BY ITS PRESIDENT, ANANTAPUR.
5. THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE OFFICER, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S): 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 toto issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondent no.3 in not settling the retirement benefits of the petitioner, as illegal, unjust and against Art. 21 of Constitution of India
2
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SATYANARAYANA NIMMALA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR COOPERATION (AP)
2. N SAI PHANINDRA KUMAR
3. K NARSI REDDY The Court made the following ORDER:
On 30.03.2026 and 06.04.2026, at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the matter was adjourned. When the matter was listed on 22.04.2026, there was no representation for the petitioner and it is posted today i.e., 23.04.2026, under the caption for dismissal.
2. Though the matter is listed today under the caption for dismissal, none appeared for the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for default.
3. Sri Sarath Chandra, learned counsel representing Sri N. Sai Phanindra Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 to 5., is present.
4. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 23.04.2026 GVK
3
105 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM
WRIT PETITION No.24031 of 2017
Date: 23.04.2026
GVK