APHC010782342018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 39039/2018 Between: 1. M/S NMR CONSTRUCTIONS AND CONSULTANCY SERVICES,, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI N.MADHAVA REDDY, H.NO2/227-1A,BALAJINAGAR,KADAPA ...PETITIONER AND 1. KADAPA EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, OFFICE OF THE RECOVERY OFFICER (MINISTRY OF LABOUR,GOVEMMENT OF INDIA) 1/30,RAILWAY STATION ROAD,KADAPA 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION,REGIONAL OFFICE,1/30,RS.ROAD,KADAPA. 3. THE REGISTRAR, YOGIVEMANA UNIVERSITY,KADAPA. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPARTMENT, KADAPA. 5. THE SECRETARY, ZILLA GRANDHALAYA SAMITHI,KADAPA. 6. THE DISTRICT COORDINATOR OF HOSPITAL SERVICES, APVVP, KADAPA. 7. RAJIV GANDHI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES COLLEGE 2 AND HOSPITAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,PUTLAMPALLI,KADAPA ...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 to issue a writ of Mandamus or such other order or direction declaring the action of the 1st respondent in issuing proceedings of arrest dt.2-8-2018 with No.AP/54826/KDP2018/22879 even before the 2nd respondent determined the amounts due finally under Secs 14B and 7Q of the act and without issuing any notice or hearing the respondents 3 to7 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the EPF act and the constitutional provisions namely arts 14 and 21, violation of principles of natural justice and fair play and consequently set-aside the same and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 order stay of execution of the proceedings dt.2-8-2018 of the 1st respondent, pending the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S SREERAMACHANDRA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. TENEPALLI NIRANJAN (SC FOR Y V UNIVERWSITY)) 2. P RAMABHOOPAL REDDY 3. S MURALI MOHAN 4. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: On 10.02.2026, it is represented that the learned counsel for the petitioner is no more and this Court directed to issue notice to the petitioner. 2. The endorsement of the Registry would indicate that notice sent to the petitioner was returned with an endorsement ‘no such person’. Despite the matter listed several times, there was no representation for the petitioner, accordingly, the matter has been listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’. 3. The matter is of the year 2018. When the matters are pending before the Courts, the parties should invariably be in contact with their advocates and pursue the matters meticulously. 4. Today also, there is no representation for the petitioner. It shows that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the case, as such, the same is liable to be dismissed. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for non prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 15th June, 2026 RKS