APHC010501162007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 1070/2007 Between: B. Munikrishna ...PETITIONER AND The Chief Engineer Om Southern Power Distribution Co. and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A CHANDRAIH NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL 2. Venkata Rama Rao Kota SC FOR APSPDCL The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings dated 26.08.2004 issued by the 2nd respondent and the consequent proceedings dated 21.11.2006 passed by the 1st respondent. 2. On 18.11.2024 and 26.11.2024, there was no representation for the petitioner. Today also, none appeared for the petitioner. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation placed a copy of Memo dated 29.08.2011 issued by the Superintending Engineer, Operation, Tirupati, which reads as under:- 2 “As per proceedings of the District Collector, Chittoor the social status of Sri B. Munikrishna is confirmed as S.C. Mala Dasari Community and now there is no dispute with regard to his social status. It is decided by the undersigned that the period of suspension from 20.08.2004 to 21.03.2007 shall be treated as duty duly adjusting subsistence allowance already paid to him and also he is eligible for all benefits i.e., sanction of annual increments for suspension period, arrears of surrender leave on revised pay and effect pay revisions upto 2010 as per rules. It is ordered that the period of suspension from 26.08.2004 to 21.03.2007 in respect of Sri B. Munikrishna, Senior Asst. is treated as duty besides eligible for all benefits as per rules.” 4. A plain reading of the above verbatim, transpires that the grievance of the petitioner is fulfilled, as the period of the suspension from 26.08.2004 to 21.03.2007 of the petitioner has been treated as duty. Further, the respondent authority also paid all the benefits to him for the said period and the petitioner had been reinstituted into the service. Therefore, by making the said Memo dated 29.08.2011, a part of the record, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 28.01.2025 GVK 3 118 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.1070 of 2007 Date: 28.01.2025 GVK