1 APHC010549912024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 28908 of 2024 Bench Sr.No:- 23 [3543] Mekathoti Yesupadam @ Seshu Babu ...Petitioner Vs. The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...Respondent(s) ********** CORAM : SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR DATE : 18th August 2026 Present : Advocate for Petitioner: B PRAKASAM Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): GP FOR SERVICES I, Y N VIVEKANANDA 2 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WP No.28908 OF 2024 ORDER:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ninala Jayasurya) 1. The present writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: “To issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents in sanctioning the retiremental benefits to the petitioner towards the encashment of earned leave, despite an interim stay order passed by the Hon’ble High Court in CRP No.2296 of 2024, dt.04.10.2024 against the attachment order passed by the Hon’ble Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gurajala, dated 09.09.2024 in EP No.15 of 2024 in OS No.282 of 2018 and also without evincing any interest even to receive my representation dt.18.11.2024 as to sanction in the leave encashment is illegal, infringement, unjust, nul and void, void ab-initio, capricious, unwarranted, besides the deliberate violation of principles of natural justice and utter negation of fundamental rights, guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents as to sanction the earned leave amount to the petitioner by receiving and considering his representation dt.18.11.2024 and to pass.” 2. The brief facts which are relevant for disposal of the case may be narrated as follows:- (i) The petitioner worked as Field Assistant in X Additional District Court, Gurazala, and retired from the service on 29.02.2024 on attaining age of superannuation. He got 241 3 days of Earned Leave and 59 days of Half Pay Leave to his credit as per the Service Register, as on 29.02.2024. An amount of Rs.9,12,156/- was sanctioned towards encashment of Earned Leave for 241 days and 59 days of half pay sick leave. (ii) A suit in OS No.282 of 2018 instituted against the petitioner in the Court of IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, for recovery of a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- on the basis of a promissory note purportedly executed by him in favour of one Tamada Ratna Kumari was decreed on 13.07.2023. Aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the petitioner preferred an appeal with a delay of 95 days along with an application seeking condonation of the delay and the said appeal is pending adjudication. (iii) In the meanwhile, the Decree Holder filed EP No.15 of 2024 under Order 21 Rule 52 CPC seeking attachment of retirement benefits of the petitioner. The executing Court by order dt.09.09.2024 allowed the EP. 3. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed CRP No.2296 of 2024 before this Court, wherein by order dt.04.10.2024 interim stay of further proceedings in EP No.15 of 2024 was granted. 4 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that, inspite of the interim order dt.04.10.2024 in CRP No.2296 of 2024, the respondents are not sanctioning the retirement benefits payable to the petitioner towards encashment of Earned Leave and Half-Pay Leave. Hence, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court by filing the present writ petition. 5. Be that as it may, it is brought to our notice that, the main Civil Revision Petition was disposed of by a learned Single Judge vide order dt.11.03.2026. The relevant portion of the order, reads as follows:- “Civil Revision Petition is allowed setting the orders dated 09.09.2024 in EP No.15 of 2024, on the file of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gurajala in OS No.282 of 2018, on the file of the Court of the learned IV Additional Senior Civil Judge, Guntur and the matter is remitted back to the Court below for fresh adjudication to satisfy itself about the particular head of the retirement benefits that is sought to be attached after hearing both the parties.” 7. As the relief sought in the present writ petition is based on the interim order granted in the above said revision petition which came to be disposed of, with the aforesaid directions, the writ petition has become infructuous. 8. Therefore, no further adjudication in the writ petition is required and accordingly the same is closed. 5 There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending applications, if any shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA ______________________ JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR 18.08.2026 DR 6 102 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR WP No.28908 of 2024 Date 18.08.2026 U DR