1 APHC010345932018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16008/2018 Between: P. Sambasiva Rao, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of A P and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K DURGA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR EDUCATION (AP) 2. GP FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION (AP) 3. GHANTA SRIDHAR The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer: “…..to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, (i) declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in allowing respondents 4 to 6 to retire the petitioner on attaining 58 years of age on 30.06.2018 though the age of superannuation fixed under AICTE Regulations as 62 years, and 60 years as per amended Section 78-A of the A.P. Education 2 Act, 1982 as illegal, arbitrary, discrimination, unconstitutional, and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, (2) consequently direct the respondents 4 to 6 to continue the petitioner in service as Junior Assistant in 6th respondent institution till he attain the age of superannuation, i.e., 62 years of age if AICTE rules are applied or up to 60 years as per Section 78-A of the A.P. Education Act, 1982 in case if the petitioner is treated as non-teaching staff and to pass such other order or orders……” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the light of the interim orders passed by this Court, the petitioner continued in service and now retired from service after attaining the age of superannuation. It is beneficial to extract the interim order passed by this Court dated 29.06.2018, which reads as under: “This matter is taken up out of turn on the mention made by the learned counsel for petitioner stating that petitioner is retiring from service on 31.06.2018 treating him that he attained the age of 58 years, whereas petitioner is entitled to continue in service till he attains age of 60 years and on similar issue, this Court passed orders made in WPMP.No.23702 of 2017 in W.P.No.19451 of 2017. In view of earlier orders of this Court in W.P.No.19451 of 2017, there shall be interim direction as prayed for.” 3. Learned counsel would further submit that no further orders are required in this matter. 4. Learned Government Pleader for Education would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 3 5. In the light of the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 06.03.2025 ARR 4 161 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16008/2018 Dt.06.03.2025 ARR