APHC010676712018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 32940/2018 Between: 1. A.VENKATA RAMULU, S/O THIMMAIAH, AGED 40 YEARS, OCC. WORKING AS A MESSANGER, R/O H.NO.7-251-1, TARAKARAMA NAGAR, DHONE - 518222, KURNOOL DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE CHAIRMAN ANDHRA PRAGATHI GRAMINA BANK, HEAD OFFICE, P.B.NO.65, NEAR MARIYAPURAM CHURCH, MARIYAPURA, KADAPA TOWN -516001 ANDHRA PRADESH 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, ANDHRA PRAGATHI GRAMINA BANK, HEAD OFFICE, P.B.NO.65, NEAR MARIYAPURAM CHURCH, MARIYAPURA, KADAPA TOWN -516001 ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ANDHRA PRAGATHI GRAMINA BANK, DHONE, KURNOOL DISTRICT -518553 ANDHRA PRADESH ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKATA RAGHU MANNEPALLI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V UMA DEVI The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent no.3 to continue the petitioner as a messenger or sweeper in the Andhra Pragathi Gramina Bank, Dhone, Kurnool District by following the orders of the Honorable High Court in WP.No.18137 of 2009 in WP.MP.No.23756 of 2009 and consequently direct the respondent No.1 and 2 to regularise the service of the petitioner from 01.06.1996 2 to till date and to pay all the benefits to the petitioner by following RBI guidelines.” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri M.Venkata Raghu, leanred counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Petitioner herein and others filed W.P.No.18137 before the Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh, wherein, the Respondents-Authorities were directed to consider the representation of the Petitioner herein for regularization. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for Respondent-Bank would submit that their representations were considered and orders have also been passed even in the year 2018. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, recording the same, the petition may be disposed of, since no further orders are required. 5. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:02.04.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.32940 of 2018 Dt.02.04.2025 Dinesh