Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13224 (AP)

MOLAKALA SARITHA v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/8460/2025 · 2025-04-02

Challa Gunaranjan

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010158332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] WEDNESDAY ,THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 8460/2025 Between: Molakala Saritha and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P NARASIMHULU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES I 2. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:- “…to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or direction declaring that the action of the respondents in not releasing the all service benefits of T.Nagendra Reddy to the petitioners is as illegal arbitrary violation of Article 14, 21 and 300A of the constitution of India and contrary to the procedure prescribed under the law and consequently direct the respondents to release all the service benefits of above said T.Nagendra Reddy to the petitioners forthwith and pass such other order or orders.…” 2. Heard Sri P.Narasimhulu, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleaders for Services-I & II appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. The grievance of the petitioners in short is that the husband of petitioner No.1 while working as teacher went missing, a complaint was lodged vide FIR No.36 of 2017 on 04.03.2017 before Prodduturu Rural Police Station as missing case. After investigation, final report was filed referring the case as undetectable. Thereafter, petitioners made representation dated 07.03.2025 to the respondents claiming for service benefits of the husband of petitioner No.1, which is stated to be pending. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the representation will be considered in accordance with law. 5. In view of pendency of the representation made by petitioners, which is stated to be pending before the respondents, this Writ Petition is disposed directing the respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on petitioners representation dated 07.03.2025 within a period of four (04) weeks strictly in accordance with law. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date: 02nd April, 2025 RKS