APHC010418382018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No.19464/2018 Between: G.Sudhakar, ...PETITIONER AND Andhra Pradesh State Cooperative Rural Irrigation Corporation Limited and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V RAMANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR LABOUR (AP) 2. 3. GP FOR AGRICULTURE (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “... to issue a Writ Order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not implementing the G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance HR IVFR Department, dated 8.8.2017 for continuation of the services of the Petitioner upto the age of 60 years while continuing the similarly situated persons in the same District and in other Districts i.e.Cuddapah and Chittoor of same Corporation in spite of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos.14033-34 of 2017 dated 5.5.2017 and the orders of the Division Bench of the Hon’ble High Court in WPMP No.20915/2017 in WP No.6491 of 2017 dated 18.5.2017 and Learned Single Judge in WPMP No.21019 of 2017 in W P No.17171 of 2017 dated 18.5.2017 is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, declare that the Petitioner is entitled to continue 2 upto the age of 60 years without there being any break in service with all continuity and with pay and allowances.” 2. Learned Government Pleader for Cooperation appearing for respondents on instructions, would submit that in the light of the interim order passed by this Court on 18.06.2018 in IA No.1 of 2018, Petitioner was continued in service and after attaining the age of 60 years, he retired from Service on superannuation and no further orders are necessary in this Writ Petition. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that recording the said submission, the Writ Petition may be disposed of. 4. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 19464 of 2018 21.03.2025 Mjl /*