APHC010681242017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] MONDAY,THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 17764/2017 Between: K.Nagabhushanam, and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. M SHALINI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE (AP) 2. B PRAKASAM 3. BABUJI TENNETI (STANDING COUNSEL FOR APSC CFC) 4. B PRUDHVI KUMAR (SC FOR APSCCFC) The Court made the following: 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 relieving the petitioners at the age of 58 years instead of 60 years is contrary to the provisions of Act No.4, dated 27th June, 2014, resolution, 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 reinduct the petitioners and continue them in service up to 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 to pass...” 2. The substratum of the writ petition is that the petitioners are the employees of respondent No.2-Corporation and they are seeking extension of their services from 58 years to 60 years. 3. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri P.Venkata Rama Sarma, learned counsel representing Smt. M.Shalini, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri G.Ratna Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Caste Co-operative Finance Corporation Ltd., jointly report that consequent to the Interim directions of this Court dated 07.06.2017, the services of the petitioners herein were extended up to 60 years and thereafter, they retired from service on 13.06.2018. 4. Recording the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for both sides, this Court is of the opinion that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for further adjudication in the lis. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. 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. _____________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J 21.07.2025. SRT 14 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO.17764 of 2017 21.07.2025 SRT