APHC010167112018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 7334/2018 Between: 1. M. RAMARAO, S/O.ANJANEYULU, AGED ABOUT 33 YRS., RAVIPADU GRAM PANCHAYAT, KATEPALLI POST, VINJAMUR(M),S.P.S.R.NELLORE DIST. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, RURAL DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF A P, RURAL DEVELOPMENT, D.NO. 29-6-10, PEDDI BOTLA TOWERS, BESIDE CHARITASRI BUILDING, NAKKALA ROAD, GOVERNOR PET, VIJAYAWADA, A.P. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NELLORE, S.P.S.R. NELL ORE DISTRICT. 4. THE MANDAL PARISHAD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, MANDAL PRAJA PARISHAD, VINJAMUR(M),S.P.S.R.NELLORE DIST. 5. THE PROJECT DIRECTOR AND EXOFFICIO, JT. SECRETARY, S.R.D.S, DISTRICT WATER MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION(DWMA) S.P.S.R.NELLORE DIST. ...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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus the order of 4th respondent vide Rc.No./NREGS/2018, Dt. 12.02.2018 is bad, illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to the enquiry report of the 4th respondent Dt. 07.05.2015 and also offends Arts. 19,21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and apart from violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the same and to pass 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V N KIRAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) 2. M S R CHANDRA MURTHY 3. G SESHADRI(SC FOR MPP ZPP) 4. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “ .... to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of respondents 3 and 4 in not selecting the petitioner for Section Officer post in 3rd respondent institute in pursuance of recruitment notification dt.23.2.2017 and declaring as none found suitable in the web site on 18.1.2018 as highly illegal arbitrary and against the circular instructions issued by respondent No.2 and consequently declare that petitioner is entitle for appointment to the post of Section officer in the 3rd respondent institute and pass ....” 2. When the matter is called, none represented for the Petitioner. 3. Despite the matter being listed under the caption “For dismissal”, none represented for the Petitioner today. 4. Learned Special Counsel appearing for respondents is in attendance. 5. In that view, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 7334 of 2018 09.07.2025 Mjl /*