/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI APHC010736102018 (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE . ' TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE . PRESENT ■pHt HON’BLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA , WRIT PETITION NO: 35575 OF 2018 , Between: A Prabhakar Raju, S/o. Seetha Rama Raju, Aged about 59 years, Occ: Jr. Lecturer, R/o 2/928, Nehru nagar, Chinna Chowk, Kadapa Town and District. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Principal Secretary Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur, Guntur District. 2. The Board of Intermediate, A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 3. The Commissioner, Board of Intermediate, Andhra Pradesh, Guntur. 4. The Regional Joint Director, Board of Intermediate Education, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 5. The Regional Inspection Officer, Board of Intermediate Education, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 6. The Correspondent, A.V.S. Aided Junior College, Madhavaram, Kadapa District. School ...Respondent(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 6th respondent in not conducting selection committee meeting of the proceedings dated 18.05.2018 by the 2nd respondent is illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the Respondent to conduct selection committee meeting. lA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 6th respondent to conduct Selection Committee Meeting as per the proceedings dated 18.05.2018 of the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 6th respondent to conduct Selection committee meeting as per the proceedings dated 18.05.2018 of the 2nd respondent, pending disposal of the above Writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI GUTTAPALEM VIJ^V^ KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: SRI S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR EDUCATION The Court made the following: ORDER I • 1 APHC010736102018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) 0MS wm [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 35575/2018 Between: A Prabhakar Raju ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.GUTTAPALEM VIJAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR EDUCATION (AP) 2.S LAKSHMINARAYANA REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer; “ ® or direction more particulariy one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus deciaring the action of the respondent in not conducting selection committee meeting of the proceedings dated 18.05.2018 by the 2^*^ respondent is iilegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the Respondent to conduct selection committee meeting and pass such other order or orders ” i 2 I- 2. Heard Sri Guttapalem Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Lakshminarayana Reddy, learned counsel for the 6'^ respondent. Learned counsel for the 6'^ respondent would submit that no further orders are required in this matter as the cause of action does not Respondent No.6 has conducted DPC and some others were promoted in the said post. 3. survive. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this Court has passed interim order directing the respondents to conduct DPC. But they have conducted DPC just before the retirement of the petitioner, petitioner now retired on Superannuation. The petition may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to submit his representation to the authorities to consider his case for giving notional benefits atleast. 4. The 5. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, it does not preclude the petitioner to submit his representation to the concerned authorities to consider his case for notional benefits. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. RAO ACHARI assistantregistrar //TRUE COPY// SE N OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, School Education Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur, Guntur District. 2. The Secretary, Board of Intermediate, A.P., Andhra Pradesh, Vijayawada, Krishna District. I 3. The Commissioner, Board of Intermediate, Andhra Pradesh, Guntur. 4. The Regional Joint Director, Board of Intermediate Education, Kadapa, YSR Kadapa District. 5. The Regional Inspection Officer, Board of Intermediate Education, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 6. The Correspondent, A.V.S. Aided Junior College, Madhavaram, Kadapa District. 7. One CC to Sri Guttapalem Vijaya Kumar Advocate [OPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP for Education, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. One CC to Sri S Lakshminarayana Reddy Advocate [OPUC] 10. Three CD Copies TF HIGH COURT DATED:24/06/2025 ORDER WP 35575/2018 6 JUL 2025 j|l 4.-«^<ufTent SectiittXC^ DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS