C. Mohan Murali, v. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams
WP/12214/2019 · 2025-07-29
B V L N Chakravarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 19269 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 19269 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010268472019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) m WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY , TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. V. L. N. CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 12214 OF 2019 Between: C. Mohan Murali, S/o. C. Muni Ratnam Reddy, aged about 55 years, Occ; Junior Assistant, Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Employee Co-op Credit Society Limited, H.No.1-8, Bandlamitta Street, Tiruchanoor, Tirupati, Chittoor District - 517503. Tirupati, Chittoor District. ...Petitioner AND
1. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, Rep. by its Executive Officer, Tirupati, Chittoor District
2. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, Rep. by its Joint Executive Officer, Tirupati, Chittoor District. 3. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, Rep. by its Deputy Executive Officer (Services), Tirupati, Chittoor District. 4. Employees Coop Credit Society Limited, Rep. by its General Manager, Tirupati, Chittoor District. ...Respondents 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, by declaring the action of the Respondents 1 to 4 in issuance of the proceedings dated 22.10.2018 vide No.E6/6501/201 8 and
Memo vide Roc.No.EB1/127/TTDEB/2015 dated 23.10.2018 is illegal and consequently declare the Petitioner is employee of the 4th Respondent society and he was no way related to the Respondents 1 to 3 and further declare that declaring the petitioner Srivari Sevak at Kurukshetra, New Delhi i illegal, arbitrary and violative of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. lA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the proceedings dated 22.10.2018 vide No.E6/6501/2018 and Memo vide Roc.No.EB1/127/TTDEB/2015 dated 23.10.2018 and pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. NIMMAGADDA REVATHI (not present) Counsel for the Respondents: SRI A. SUMANTH ( SC FOR TTD) The Court made the following order:
% APHC010268472019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT [3368] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 12214/2019 Between:
1.C. MOHAN MURALI,, S/0.
C. MUNI RATNAM REDDY, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC JUNIOR ASSISTANT, TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS EMPLOYEE CO OP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, H.NO.1-8, BANDLAMITTA STREET, TIRUCHANOOR, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517503. TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1 TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS, REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT 2 TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS, REP. BY ITS JOINT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3 TIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS, REP. BY ITS DEPUTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER (SERVICES), TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4.EMPLOYEES COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT.
TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the
2 High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, by declaring the action of the Respondents 1 to 4 in issuance of the proceedings dated 22.10.2018 vide No.E6/6501/2018 and Memo vide Roc.No.EB1/127/TTDEB/2015 dated 23.10.2018 is illegal and consequently declare the Petitioner is employee of the 4th Respondent society and he was no way related to the Respondents 1 to 3 and further declare that declaring the petitioner Srivari Sevak at Kurukshetra, New Delhi i illegal, arbitrary and violative of the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 to suspend the proceedings dated 22.10.2018 vide No.E6/6501/2018 and Memo vide Roc.No.EB1/127/TTDEB/2015 dated 23.10.2018 and pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 to receive Reply Affidavit on record by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.NIMMAGADDA REVATHI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1 .A SUMANTH ( SC FOR TTD)
2. THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 12214 of 2019 The Court made the following Order: No representation for the petitioner. Sri A.Sumanth, learned Standing Counsel for respondent TTD would submit that the present Writ Petition was filed questioning the transfer order. Pursuant to the transfer order, the petitioner did not join the post, consequent to which, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and found that the alleged charges were proved against the petitioner and thereby, the petitioner was removed from the service. He would further submit that challenging the said removal
order, the petitioner filed another Writ Petition No.5329 of 2022 and the same is pending adjudication. Therefore, nothing remains in the present Writ Petition, as the petitioner is no longer in service and another Writ Petition was also filed challenging the removal order.
2.
3. Considering the above facts and circumstances, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner was removed from service and another Writ Petition was filed challenging the removal order. As rightly contended by learned Standing Counsel, nothing in the present Writ Petition. remains
-V\ i I 4
4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.
Sd/- B PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// / SECTIOTTOFFICER To,
1. One CC to M/s. Nimmagadda Revathi, Advocate [OPUC]
2. One CC to Sri A. Sumanth, ( SC for TTD) [OPUC]
3. Two CD Copies Cnr
% HIGH COURT DATED;30/07/2025
ORDER WP NO. 12214 OF 2019 DISMISSING THE W.P AS WITHOUT COSTS INFRUCTUOUS