APHC010377812022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 23070/2022 Between: Gudapaty Rajesh Dinakar ...PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B. JAYA PRABHAKARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES III 2. GP FOR SERVICES I 3. GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following: ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “… to issue any writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioner in the post of School Assistant under Physically Handicapped (Blindness and Low Vision) category (roster point-6) reserved for Women though the petitioner is in No.1 merit list of visually handicapped category and in not considering the representation, dated 14.02.2022, of the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to 2 CGR, J. W.P.No.23070 of 2022 para.17 of the notification issued by the Commissioner inviting applications for the posts, Rule 20 of the TET cum TRT Rules, 2019, issued by the Government read with the Proviso to Rule 22(2)(e) of A. P. State and Subordinate Rules, 1996, procedure for carry forward, interchange process of vacancies under Section 34(2) of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and also violative of the Orders of this Hon’ble Court in W. P. No.9013 of 2021, dated 16.08.2021 and W. P. No.23491 of 2020, dated 19.02.2021, and consequently, direct the 4th respondent to appoint the Petitioner in the above said post and pass….” 2. This Court has passed interim order, dated 28.07.2022, directing 4th respondent to examine the representation, dated 14.02.2022, of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. In pursuance to the said interim order, the 4th respondent passed speaking orders, dated 06.12.2022, however, rejected the claim of the petitioner. Assailing the same, petitioner filed W.P.No.1295 of 2023. 3. In view of subsequent developments and filing of fresh writ petition, the cause in the present writ petition does not survive. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any, in this case shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date:02.04.2025. cs