APHC010511202006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION No.19868 OF 2006 Between: The Superintending Engineer, Dam Maintenance Circle, NSRS Project, Srisailam Dam East, Kurnool District-518102, and others. ...Petitioners AND Sri S.Shankaraiah, L.V.Driver, Grade II, S/o.S.Rama Lingam, O/o.The Executive Engineer, M& MPI Division, Red Hills, Hyderabad. ...Respondent Counsel for the Petitioners : The G.P. for Services II Counsel for the Respondent : Ms.A.Deepthi The Court made the following ORDER: (per Hon’ble NJS,J) The petitioners, aggrieved by the orders dated 05.6.2006 in O.A. No.5203 of 2005 passed by the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad, filed the present writ petition. 2. The respondent/applicant, who was working as Light Vehicle Driver, filed the said O.A., challenging the Proceedings dated 11.7.2005 reverting him to the post of Helper on various grounds. The learned Tribunal after considering the matter by a detailed order giving cogent reasons as set out in paragraph No.18 of the impugned order, allowed the O.A., directing the Authorities/writ petitioners to continue the applicant as Light Vehicle Driver by setting aside the Proceedings dated 11.7.2005. 2 WP_19868_2006 3. The writ petition was filed in the year 2006. While taking note of the fact that the respondent/applicant was working as a Driver for the last seven years, the Division Bench was not inclined to grant interim stay of the order passed by the Tribunal and dismissed the miscellaneous application, vide order dated 18.1.2007. More than nineteen (19) years have since been elapsed; we are not inclined to examine the matter in detail and in fact the learned Tribunal assigned cogent reasons and relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gujarat Agricultural University vs. Rathod Labhu Bechar1. 4. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is closed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J ____________________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J August 19, 2025 vasu 1 2001 AIR SCW 351 = (2001) 3 SCC 574