APHC010015952003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 4815/2003 Between: 1. S.VIJAYA PRATAPM, S/O S.MALLU NAIDU, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, CORPORATE OFFICE, E.P.D.C.L.OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, NEAR SARASWATHI PARK, DABAGARDENS, VISAKHAPATNAM. 1. THE GENERAL MANAGER PERSONNEL, A.P.TRANSCO., VIDYUT SOUDHA, KHAIRATABAD, HYDERABAD. 2. THE JOINT MANAGING DIRECTOR H R D REVENUE, A.P.TRANSCO, VIDYUT SOUDHA, KHAIRTABAD, HYDERABAD. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not restoring the status of the petitioner in all respects incl consequent upon acquittal of criminal case and dropping of disciplinary proceedings based on such criminal proceedings, as bad, illegal, arbitrary and violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and consequentially direct the respondents to pay monitory benefits w.e.f.9 of Asst. Divisional Engineer (Electrical and to restore all consequential benefits including seniority. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 4815/2003 S.VIJAYA PRATAPM, S/O S.MALLU NAIDU, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, CORPORATE OFFICE, E.P.D.C.L.OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, NEAR SARASWATHI PARK, DABAGARDENS, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER AND THE GENERAL MANAGER PERSONNEL, A.P.TRANSCO., VIDYUT SOUDHA, KHAIRATABAD, HYDERABAD. THE JOINT MANAGING DIRECTOR H R D REVENUE, A.P.TRANSCO, VIDYUT SOUDHA, KHAIRTABAD, HYDERABAD. ...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 to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not restoring the status of the petitioner in all respects including monitory benefits, consequent upon acquittal of criminal case and dropping of disciplinary proceedings based on such criminal proceedings, as bad, illegal, arbitrary and violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and consequentially rect the respondents to pay monitory benefits w.e.f.9-7-1999 in the category of Asst. Divisional Engineer (Electrical and to restore all consequential IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3332] THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI S.VIJAYA PRATAPM, S/O S.MALLU NAIDU, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, CORPORATE OFFICE, E.P.D.C.L.OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, NEAR SARASWATHI PARK, DABAGARDENS, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER THE GENERAL MANAGER PERSONNEL, A.P.TRANSCO., VIDYUT THE JOINT MANAGING DIRECTOR H R D REVENUE, A.P.TRANSCO, VIDYUT SOUDHA, KHAIRTABAD, HYDERABAD. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not restoring uding monitory benefits, consequent upon acquittal of criminal case and dropping of disciplinary proceedings based on such criminal proceedings, as bad, illegal, arbitrary and violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and consequentially 1999 in the category of Asst. Divisional Engineer (Electrical and to restore all consequential 2 IA NO: 1 OF 2003(WPMP 6325 OF 2003 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 order expedite hearing by fixing an early date for hearing of the main Writ petition, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. E SAMBASIVA PRATAP Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. ANUP KOUSHIK KARAVADI(SC FOR APTRANSCO) 3 The Court made the following order: Sri V.V.Narasimham, learned counsel, representing Sri E.Sambasiva Pratap, learned counsel or the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has not been in contact with him for a long time. He further submits that though he addressed a letter to the petitioner seeking instructions, the same was returned unserved with an endorsement ‘left’. Since the matter pertains to the year 2003 and the petitioner has not been pursuing the case through his advocate, it shows that the petitioner has no interest in prosecuting the matter. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. However, if the petitioner feels that the cause still survives, he can file appropriate application within a period of two (2) months. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI 11.08.2025 MP 4 204 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 4815 of 2003 Dated: 11.08.2025 MP