APHC010395872012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 7203/2012 Between: Shaik Mohiddin Basha, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M VENKATA RAMANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC) The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “….to issue any appropriate writ order or direction preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ Of Mandamus declaring the condition No 2 i Driver Gr.II i.e., Rs.7,180/ with permanent effect in the proceedings No PA/ 7.8.2010 issued by the 1st respondent consequently set aside and pass IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 7203/2012 ...PETITIONER AND Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: M VENKATA RAMANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC) The Court made the following: his writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for any appropriate writ order or direction preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ Of Mandamus declaring the condition No 2 i.e., his pay shall be fixed in the minimum time scale of 180/ with permanent effect in the proceedings No PA/192/2010EDKN dt 2010 issued by the 1st respondent, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and ss…..” IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3310] THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT(S) his writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for any appropriate writ order or direction preferably a Writ in the nature of Writ Of minimum time scale of 192/2010EDKN dt arbitrary and unconstitutional and 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the sole petitioner in the present writ petition was passed away, and the Legal Representative of the deceased-petitioner also passed away. Therefore, nothing survives in the present writ petition for further adjudication and the same may be closed. 3. Recording the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is closed. No costs. 4. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. K. MANMADHA RAO, J. Date : 13-03-2025 Gvl HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.7203 of 2012 Date : 13-03-2025 Gvl