IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 18444 OF 2011 Between: Pallela Venkata Srinivasa Rao, S/o Bhadra Rao, Shramik, E-497017, aged 35 years, C/o Malireddy subbarao, Nemam, Kakinada Rural Mandal, East Godavari District. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Repd.by its Vice Chairman & Managing Director R.T.C.Cross Roads, Hyderabad. 2. The Depot Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Gokavaram Depot, East Godavari District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus calling for the relevant records pertaining to I.D.No.90 of 2007, dated 15-02-2011, on the file of the Hon'ble Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatanam published in G.O.Rt.No.421, Dated 05-03-2011 confirming the removal order passed by the 2nd respondent in proceedings No.P1/1(135)/2K-GKRM, dated: 03-02-2001, Consequently direct the respondents herein to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits forthwith. r Counsel for the Petitioner; SRI S A RAZAK Counsel for the Respondents: SRI S V RAMANA The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010737952011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 18444/2011 Between; \, Pallela Venkata Srinivasa Rao, ...PETITIONER AND The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation ...RESPONDENT(S) and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.S ARAZAK Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.S V RAMANA The Court made the following: Order:- Despite the matter being listed under the caption for dismissal, today none represented for the petitioner. On earlier occasion also, there is no representation for the petitioner. Therefore, this Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- A. VENUGOPALA RAO ASS?STAf^ REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// To, SECTION OFFICER 1. One CC to Sri S A Razak, Advocate [OPUC] [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri S V Ramana, Advocate 3. Three CD Copies TF HIGH COURT N 'i DATED:30/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.18444of 2011 DISMISSING THE W.P. FOR NON-PROSECUTION, WITHOUT COSTS