APHC010463502007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 20933/2007 Between: 1. P. PRASADA RAO,, S/O. P. ANANDAM, HINDU, TEMPORARY COMPUTER OPERATOR, TTD KALYANAKATTA, R/O. 19-8-181/E.11, SBI COLONY (YADAV COLONY), TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAMS ANOTHER, REP. BYITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUPATHI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. THE JOINT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TIRUMALA TIRUPATHI DEVASTHANAMS, TIRUMALA, CHITTOOR 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 toto issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not issuing the appointment order as 'Piece Rate Barbar', though he was selected by the Competent Authority, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondent to issue appointment orders appointing as 'Piece Rage Barbar' and pass such other order or orders as this HOn'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2007(WPMP 27141 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 Respondent -1 to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner dt. 15-9-2007, seeking immediate issue of appointment orders based upon the selection list displayed on the Notice Board, pending disposal of the Writ Petition, and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G RAMACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. S VENKATESWARA RAO(SC FOR TTD) The Court made the following: ORDER: Sri V.Srinivasula Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri G.Rama Chandra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and has become infructuous. Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 15th September, 2025 RKS