Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26155 (AP)

B.VENKATESULU, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT & 2 OTHERS v. CENTRAL POWER DIST.CO.OF AP LTD., HYDERABAD & 3 OTHERS

WP/21653/2007 · 2025-09-25

Ravi Cheemalapati

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010370162007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 21653/2007 Between: 1. B.VENKATESULU, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT & 2 OTHERS, LINEMAN APCPDCL., R/O GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 2. D. DEVA KUMAR, S/O D. DEVADANAM, LINEMAN, APCPDCL., R/O GUNTAKAL ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 3. M. BASHEER AHMED, S/O RAJAB SABEB, LINEMAN, APCPDCL., R/O GUNTAKAL, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. CENTRAL POWER DIST CO OF AP LTD HYDERABAD 3 OTHERS, REP BYITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, RED HILLS, HYDERABAD-4. 2. CENTRAL POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANYOF A P LTD, REPBY ITS SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION CIRCLE, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 3. CENTRAL POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A P, LTD., REPBY ITS ACCOUNTS OFFICER (EXPENDITURE), ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 4. S SHASHAVALI S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, LINEMAN, VAJRAKARUR, 33/11 KV SS GUNTAKAL DIVN., ANANTAPUR DISTRICT ...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 tocall for the records from the respondents and issue an appropriate Writ, order or Direction, particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the proceedings in Memo No. SE/O/ATP/PRS/C2/1629/06, dated 5-10-2006, refusing to rectify the pay anomaly of petitioners as illegal, unjust contrary to law, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution; and grant all consequential benefits, and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2007(WVMP 3407 OF 2007 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 vacate the interim orders dated 11-10-2007in WPMP NO. 28082/2007 in WP NO. 21653/2007 in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2007(WPMP 28082 OF 2007 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 direct the respondents to fix thepay of petitioners on par with 4th respondent in the cadre of Lineman forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition; and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. A K JAYAPRAKASH RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P R BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) 2. Venkata Rama Rao Kota SC FOR APSPDCL The Court made the following: ORDER Despite listing the matter under the caption “for dismissal”, there is no representation for the petitioners. This shows that the petitioners are not interested to prosecute the matter. In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed for non prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI RR