1 APHC010502582017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 18031/2017 Between: Nallabantu Appaji Sukumar, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SUDHAKARA RAO AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. N SIVA REDDY 2. GP FOR ENERGY (AP) 3. JAGARLAMUDI KOTESWARI DEVI 4. ANUP KOUSHIK KARAVADI(SC FOR APTRANSCO) 5. N SIVA REDDY(SC FOR APTRANSCO) 6. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP) The Court Made the Following Order:- This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief: 2 “to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Memo issued by the 5th respondent dated 18.01.2016 and the consequential Memo No ADE/Op /NR Palem/J A/F No doc /D No 758/17 dated 31.05.2017 issued by the 7th respondent wherein and where under the petitioner was informed that he will be relieved of his duties from 31.05.2017 on the premise that he attained the age of superannuation 58 years as being illegal arbitrary and against the Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and more over against the orders passed by the Honble Supreme Court of India dated 05.05.2017 in SLP C No 14033 14034 of 2017 and batch and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service and continue the same with effect from 1 6 2017 till he attains the age of superannuation of 60 years on par with other Government employees in the interest of justice and to pass...” 2. Sri Phani Dhiraj, learned counsel representing Sri A.Sudhakara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in view of the subsequent events taken place in the lis, the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for further adjudication and the Writ Petition has become infructuous. 3. Recording the submission made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no orders as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. _____________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM,J 11.07.2025. ASR 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO.18031 of 2017 11.07.2025 ASR