1 APHC010716152018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 34671/2018 Between: Y. Venkata Ramana ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P V V SATYANARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. G SESHADRI 2. GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV (AP) The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 34671 of 2018 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring proceedings issued by 3rd respondent in Final Orders RC.No.C9/4164/LR Palli (Mandal)/ 12SA/2017 dated 28.07.2018 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to service conditions and contrary to law laid down by this Hon’ble Court and consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 to reinstate the petitioner as Field Assistant under MGNREG Scheme to Pandillapalli Gram Panchayat, Lakkireddypalli, Y S R District with all consequential and incidental benefits attached to the post and to pass…” 2. Heard Sri P.V.V. Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.S.R. Chandra Murthy, learned Standing Counsel for MGNREGS for the respondents. 3. Learned Standing Counsel would submit that the petitioner was initially terminated on 28.07.2018. He preferred the present petition. Thereafter he was reinstated into service. As per the latest instructions, the respondent No.3 issued proceedings terminating the services of the petitioner as Field Assistant vide orders dated 28.12.2024. Learned Standing Counsel would further submit that in the light of the latest order, the relief has become infructuous in this matter and the petition may be disposed of. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the court may pass appropriate orders giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order passed by the respondent No.3 dated 28.12.2024. 3 5. Considering the submissions made, it is apposite to dismiss the Writ petition. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order passed by the respondent No.3 terminating his services date 28.12.2024 according to law. 6. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________________ Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 08.04.2025 UPS 4 34 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.34671 of 2018 Dated.08.04.2025 UPS