APHC010298302025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 15331 OF 2025 Between: 1. NULI VENKATA NARAYANA RAO @ NULI SRINIVAS, , S/0 Ramachandra Rao, Age 59 Years, Male, Occ Secretary and Correspondent of B.G.B.S Womens College, Door No.4-3-5, Narasapur, West Godavari District, Aadhar No.849939779710, Mobile No.9849103678,E-Mail.nulisrinu@yahoo.co.in. ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, Rep by its prl secretary to Government of Andhra Pradesh, Higher Education - Department A.P Secretariat, Velagapudi Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Director, Collegiate Education, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. 3. The Regional Joint Director, Collegiate Education, Rajamahendravaram. 4. Kavali Venkata Ratnam, S/0 Narasimha Rao, Roypeta, Narasapur, West Godavari 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 an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MADAMUS declaring the action of the official respondent in issuing the SRK, J WP No.15331 of 2025 2 Notice bearing Memo No.156/C-1/2025 dated 10-06-2025 by the 3rd respondent calling upon the petitioner to available on 25-06- 2025 and to inform to the teaching and non-teaching staff and students be available for enquiry and further contented that the college properties were sold illegally made there under as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Article 14, 21 and 300 A of constitution of India and consequently set aside the Notice bearing Memo No.156/C-1/2025 dated 10-06-2026 issued by the 3rd respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: AMARESWARA RAO K Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondents: MUDUNURI ANAND KUMAR SRK, J WP No.15331 of 2025 3 The Court made the following ORDER: This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to declare the action of 3rd respondent in issuing the Notice bearing Memo No.156/C-1/2025, dated 10.06.2025, calling upon the petitioner to be available on 25.06.2025 and to inform the teaching and non- teaching staff and students be available for enquiry contending that the College properties were sold illegally, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently set aside the said notice dated 10.06.2025 issued by 3rd respondent. 2. On 25.06.2025, this Court passed the following order. “Based on certain allegations that the petitioner was involved in the illegal sale of college properties, the Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Rajamahendravaram (Respondent No.3), issued Memo No.156/C-1/2025 dated 10.06.2025, proposing to conduct an enquiry on 25.06.2025. The memo requested the petitioner, who is the Secretary & Correspondent of BGBS (W) College, Narsapur, to be present at the college on the said date. Aggrieved by the issuance of the Memo dated 10.06.2025, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. Learned Government Pleader for Education submits that, when serious allegations are made against the petitioner, the petitioner is bound to attend the enquiry. However, instead of attending the enquiry, the petitioner is resorting to delay SRK, J WP No.15331 of 2025 4 tactics which is illegal, arbitrary and requested to pass appropriate orders. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents must issue a prior notice before initiating any action against the petitioner. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for School Education, this Court deems it appropriate to direct that, upon completion of the enquiry, if the authorities arrive at a conclusion to pass any order and propose to take consequential action, the respondent authorities shall issue notice to the petitioner and afford an opportunity of hearing to submit an explanation before initiating such action. Post after four (04) weeks.” 3. Pursuant to the said order, as there was no representation on behalf of the Writ Petitioner on several occasions, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption „for dismissal‟. Though the matter is listed under the caption „for dismissal‟, there is no representation on behalf of the Writ Petitioner. 4. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of 4th respondent submitted that in connection with the illegal sale of College properties, 4th respondent conducted an enquiry and the petitioner attended the enquiry, and in view of the same, nothing SRK, J WP No.15331 of 2025 5 survives for adjudication in the Writ Petition and the matter has become infructuous. 5. Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. _______________________ K. SREENIVASA REDDY, J. Date:08.09.2025 Nsr SRK, J WP No.15331 of 2025 6 HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY Writ Petition No.15331 of 2025 Date:08.09.2025 Nsr