S. RAJALINGAM, SEC-BAD v. THE SUPDT ENGINEER, APCPDCL OP CIRCLE, HYD & ANOTHER
WP/20745/2011 · 2025-07-03
Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 36578 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 36578 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010598782011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 20745/2011 Between:
1. S. RAJALINGAM, SEC-BAD, S/O S. BALAMALLAIAH LINEMAN RETIRED I.D. NO. 1046082, LMJ STREET/C-V/SD, R/O H. NO. 5-9-135/3, EMPLOYEES COLONY, YAPRAL, SECUNDERABAD. ...PETITIONER AND
1. THE SUPDT ENGINEER APCPDCL OP CIRCLE, OPERATION CIRCLE, MINT COMPOUND HYDERABAD. 2. THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER APCPDCL, ELECTRICAL OPERATION, CITY-V PARADISE, SECUNDERABAD. ...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 1 & 2 by sanctioning pensionary benefits calculating petitioner's retirement as on 1-7-2009 instead of 31-7-2010 which actually communicated by the respondents to him and sanction of his pensionary benefits including family benefits from 31-7-2009 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of articles 14, 19(1)(g) & 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the orders and restore petitioner's retirement date as 31-7-2010 only as communicated earlier by the department. IA NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP 25200 OF 2011) 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 pass interim orders directing the respondents to release petitioner's pensionary benefits from 1-7-2009 to 31-7-2010 and to further sanction all the benefits as per the rules in existence pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass
2 IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 176558 OF 2013) 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
IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 88946 OF 2014) 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
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. S PRASAD RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. The Court made the following:
3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION NO. 20745 of 2011 ORDER:
Despite the matter listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation for the petitioner.
It evinces that the petitioner has no interest in prosecuting his case. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date : 04.07.2025 SPP
4
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
Writ Petition No:20745 of 2011
Date : 04.07.2025
SPP