1 APHC010692442018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 33386/2018 Between: M. Malla Reddy ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K R PRABHAKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V,R.N PRASHANTH SC FOR TTD 2. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer: “…..to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not treating the suspension period of the petitioner from 6-11-2003 to 17-11-2004 as Spent on Duty by directing the 2nd respondent to treat the suspension period as Leave vide proceedings of the 1st respondent in G.O.Rt.No.874 Dt. 8-10-2014 and the action of the 2nd respondent in not granting periodical increments to the petitioner from the year 2015-16 onwards without any order or reason as 2 illegal, unjust, arbitrary violative of principles of natural justice apart from violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the settled principles of Law and consequently direct the respondents to pay the periodical increments to the petitioner from the year 2015-16 onwards and also direct the to treat the suspension period as Spent on Duty from 6-11-2003 to 17-11-2004 including the increments by setting aside the proceedings of the 1st respondent in G.O.Rt.No.874 Dt. 8-10-2014 in so far directing to treat the suspension period as leave as per 54B (5) of the Fundamental Rules and pass such other order or orders……” 2. Heard Sri K.R.Prabhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.R.N.Prashanth, learned Standing Counsel for TTD. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent authorities have complied with the interim order passed by this Court dated 18.09.2018. Learned counsel would submit that the petition may be disposed of recording the same. 4. Learned Standing Counsel would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 5. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 09.04.2025 ARR 3 95 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 33386/2018 Dt.09.04.2025 ARR