APHC010163942017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 19695/2017 Between: U.siva Prasad And 9 Others and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND Prl Secretary Energy And 2 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. M SHALINI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL 2. GP FOR ENERGY (AP) 3. ANUP KOUSHIK KARAVADI(SC FOR APTRANSCO) 4. JAGARLAMUDIKOTESWARIDEVI(SC FORAPSPDCL) 5. N SIVA REDDY(SC FOR APTRANSCO) The Court made the following: ORDER: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking the following main relief:- “……to issue appropriate Writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in relieving the petitioners at the age of 58 years instead of 60 years is contrary to the provisions of Act No.4 dated 27th June, 2014, resolution, contrary to the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 05-05-2017, illegal, arbitrary and ultravires the Constitution of India consequently direct the respondents to reinduct the petitioners and continue them in service upto 60 years of age along with consequential benefits in the interest of justice as was being done in all other similarly placed persons by virtue of interim directions of this Hon’ble Court and to pass……” 2. The sum and substance in the present lis is that the petitioners are seeking continuation of their service in the respondents Corporation upto the age of 60 years. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is jointly submitted by Sri P.Venkata Rama Sarma, learned counsel representing Smt M.Shalini, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri K.Venkata Rama Rao, learned Standing Counsel for A.P.S.P.D.C.L., appearing for the respondents, that in view of the policy decision taken by the respondents-Corporation, the petitioners after attaining the age of 58 years were reinstated into service and their services were extended up to the age of 60 years. Thereafter, on attaining superannuation age of 60 years, the petitioners were retired from services way back in the year 2019 itself. While making the submissions, they state that the cause in the lis does not survive for further adjudication and seeks for closure of the writ petition. 4. Recording the submissions made by both the counsel, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous as there is no further cause in the lis that has to be adjudicated. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 25.07.2025 SRT 196 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.19695 of 2017 Date: 25.07.2025 SRT