APHC010601942017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] SATURDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 702/2017 Between: 1. M.RAJASEKHAR, S/O RATNAKOTESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC: CASHIER (U/S} SRI VENKATESWARA LARGE SCALE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., DWARAKA TIRUMALA, RIO 1-6-, SATTENAGUDEM, DWARAKA TIRUMALA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, COOPERATION & MARKETING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DIST. 2. DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOP SOCIETIES, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P. 3. SRI VENKATESWARA LARGE SCALE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, DWARAKA TIRUMALA, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, A.P., REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. ...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 toto issue any appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent society in continuing the petitioner under suspension beyond the 2 period of one year i.e., from 18.10.2014 as illegal, unjust, arbitrary and violative of Sec.47(6) of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act, 1988 and consequently direct the reinstatement of the petitioner in the 3rd respondent society and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP 780 OF 2017 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 direct the 3rd respondent to pay subsistence allowance to the petitioner in terms of Sec.47(6) of the A.P. Shops & Establishments Act, 1988 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2018 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 vacate the interim order dated 5.1.2017 in WPMP No. 780/2017 in WP No. 702/2017 in Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ELEVATED AS JUDGE Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COOPERATION (AP) 2. ASHOK RAM V 3. 3 The Court Made the Following Order:- This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief: “to issue any appropriate Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent society in continuing the petitioner under suspension beyond the period of one year i.e., from 18.10.2014 as illegal, unjust, arbitrary and violative of Sec.47(6) of the A.P. Shops and Establishments Act, 1988 and consequently direct the reinstatement of the petitioner in the 3rd respondent society and pass” 2. On 01.08.2025, this Court had directed the Registry to issue notice to the petitioner. Subsequently, the Registry had sent a notice to the petitioner and also submitted a note stating that as per the postal track report item delivered on 08.08.2025 to the petitioner. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, there is no representation for the petitioner despite the service of notice on the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the matter 4. Sri T. Raghu, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the learned Government Pleader for Cooperation appearing for the respondents 1 & 2 is present. 5. Sri Seshivardhan, learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent, submits that a counter affidavit was filed by the 3rd respondent stating that the 3rd respondent had initiated enquiry proceedings vide Rc.No.3 of 2017, dated 14.02.2017, against the petitioner and also the petitioner has already been dismissed from service with effect from 14.02.2017 itself and the suspension period of the petitioner is hereby confirmed without any monetary benefit. 6. In view of the averments in the counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, Sri Seshivardhan, learned counsel appearing for the 3rd 4 respondent submits that the cause in this Writ Petition does not survive for further adjudication. 7. Recording the submissions made by Sri Seshivardhan, learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 30.08.2025 BSM 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.702 of 2017 Date: 30.08.2025 BSM