Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 37659 (AP)

P RAMANNA, KURNOOL DIST v. PRL SECY, TRANSPORT DEPT, GUNTUR DIST & ANOTHER

WP/20255/2017 · 2025-07-24

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010655112017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 20255/2017 Between: P Ramanna, Kurnool Dist ...PETITIONER AND Prl Secy Transport Dept Guntur Dist Another and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M SHALINI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR TRANSPORT (AP) 2. ARAVALA RAMA RAO(SC FOR APSRTC KKAC) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief: “……..to issue appropriate Writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in trying to retire the petitioner at the age of 58 years instead of 60 years is contrary to the provisions of Act No.4 dated 27th June, 2014 contrary to the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court dated 05-05-2017, illegal, arbitrary and ultravires the Constitution of India consequently direct the Respondents to continue the petitioner in service upto 60 years of age along with consequential benefits in the interest of justice as was being done in all other similarly placed persons by virtue of interim directions of this Hon’ble Court and pass...” 2. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri P.Venkata Rama Sarma, learned counsel representing Smt M.Shalini, 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. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, is present. 4. Recording the submissions 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. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 25.07.2025 SRT 197 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.20255 of 2017 Date: 25.07.2025 SRT