APHC010216642021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3327] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION TRANSFERED FROM APAT NO: 51/2021 Between: 1. S GIRIJAMMA, WIFE OF LATE. S.MOHAN, AGED 48 YEARS, WOMEN ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR, 2622 KALIKIRI P.S. TIRUPATHI NOW UNDER ORDER OF RESERVATION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, JANARATHAN COLONY, OPP STAFF QUARTERS, TIRUPATI ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, A.P. HYDERABAD 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD 3. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, KURNOOL RANGE, KURNOOL 4. THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ANANTHAPURAMU RANGE, ANANTHAPURAMU 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR, ANDHRA PRADESH 6. SMT P SUMATHI, WORKING AS WOMEN ASSISTANT SUB INSPECTOR 2578 CT, 608/TU, MAHILA PS., TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2 SRK, J WP (AT) No.51 of 2021 7. SMT P RAMA DEVI, W/O. AND AGED (NOT KNOWN TO THE APPLICANT) WORKING AS WOMEN ASSISTANT SUB-INSPECTOR 2249/CT,541/CT, MAHILA P.S., TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 8. P BHUVANESWARI, W/O. AND AGED (NOT KNOWN TO THE APPLICANT) WORKING AS WOMEN ASSISTANT SUB-INSPECTOR 2249/CT, 541/CT, MAHILA P.S., TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): to declare that the applicant is entitled to be continued as Women Assistant Sub Inspector of Police with all consequential benefits in accordance with the orders issued in proceedings dt. 29.10.2013 by holding the action of the respondents in reverting the applicant to the post of Women Head Constable vide impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd and 5th respondents in C.No. C5 905 2014 R.O.O. No. 918 2015 dt. 19.12.2015 and D.O. No.1256 2015 Rc.No. A1 8119 188 2013 dt. 30.12.2015 by unsettling the settled seniority after lapse of more than eight 8 years vide Rc.No. A1 8119 188 2013 Rc.No. 5177 168 2014 dt. 5.9.2015 and D.O. No. 571 2014 Rc.No. A1 8119 188 2013 dt. 27.5.2014 and 3.7.2014 issued by the 5th respondent as being arbitrary illegal without jurisdiction unjust contrary to the provisions of Rules 24 and 25 of the A.P. State and Subordinate service Rules, 1996 and the Memo dt. 20.5.2004 and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court and to pass such other order or orders IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 pleased to receive the affidavit copy on record by allowing the leave petition in the Writ Petition in the interest of justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S GIRIJAMMA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. HARINATH REDDY SOMAGUTTA 2. D RAMAKRISHNA 3. GP FOR SERVICES I (AP) The Court made the following: 3 SRK, J WP (AT) No.51 of 2021 O R D E R This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: “….to declare that the applicant is entitled to be continued as Women Assistant Sub Inspector of Police with all consequential benefits in accordance with the orders issued in proceedings dt. 29.10.2013 by holding the action of the respondents in reverting the applicant to the post of Women Head Constable vide impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd and 5th respondents in C.No.C5 905 2014 R.O.O. No. 918 2015 dt. 19.12.2015 and D.O. No.1256 2015 Rc.No. A1 8119 188 2013 dt. 30.12.2015 by unsettling the settled seniority after lapse of more than eight 8 years vide Rc.No. A1 8119 188 2013 Rc.No. 5177 168 2014 dt. 5.9.2015 and D.O. No. 571 2014 Rc.No. A1 8119 188 2013 dt. 27.5.2014 and 3.7.2014 issued by the 5th respondent as being arbitrary illegal without jurisdiction unjust contrary to the provisions of Rules 24 and 25 of the A.P. State and Subordinate service Rules, 1996 and the Memo dt. 20.5.2004 and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court and pass such other order…” 2. On 17.6.2026, when the matter came up for hearing, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents represented that connected WP (AT) Nos. 48 of 2021, 49 of 2021 and 50 of 2021 were dismissed for non-prosecution. Therefore, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption „for dismissal‟ to today. 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner. Sri Harinath Reddy Somagutta, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.6, submits that there has been no representation on behalf of the petitioner for several adjournments. He further submits that the Writ Petitions connected with the present case, viz. W.P. (AT) 4 SRK, J WP (AT) No.51 of 2021 Nos.48 of 2021, 49 of 2021 and 50 of 2021, have already been dismissed for non-prosecution. 4. From a perusal of the records goes to show that the petitioner is not evincing any interest in prosecuting the case. The connected Writ Petitions were also dismissed for non-prosecution. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Date: 22.06.2026. MS 5 SRK, J WP (AT) No.51 of 2021 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Writ Petition (AT) No:51 of 2021 Date: 22.06.2026 MS