P.RAMYA, E.G.DISTRICT v. THE DIRECTOR, ESI INSURANCE MEDICAL SERVICES, HYD.& 2 OTHERS
WP/21620/2007 · 2025-09-25
Ravi Cheemalapati
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 32992 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 32992 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010490192007
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: 21620/2007 Between:
1. P.RAMYA, E.G.DISTRICT, STUDENT, REP BY HER GRAND FATHER (AS HER MOTHER ALSO DIED ON 15-11- 2006) B.
SATYANARAYANA S/O LATE KRISHNA RAO AGED 64 YEARS OC:
RETD EMPLOYEE R/O H. NO. 17-32-10, SEETAMPET,
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE DIRECTOR ESI INSURANCE MEDICAL SERVICES HYD 2 OTHERS, ANDHRA PRADESH HYDERABAD.
2. THE JOINT DIRECTOR INSURACNE MEDICAL, SERVICES, GUNDADALA, VIJAYAWADA.
3. THE MEDICAL OFFICER ESI DISPENSARY TOWN, GOVERNORPETA, VIJAYAWADA.
...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 toissue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay the terminal benefits of petitioner's daughter P. Sarada devi who worked as an employee in the respondents department and in the interest of justice and pass such other
order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.
IA NO: 1 OF 2007(WPMP 28047 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 expedite the above Writ Petitionfor final hearing in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. G UMAPATHI SASTRY Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. PUSHPINDER KAUR The Court made the following:
ORDER
Despite listing the matter under the caption “for dismissal”, there is no representation for the petitioner. This shows that the petitioner is 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