APHC010952452017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 43432/2017 Between: Sri Vedam Balachandran, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SYED ARIF BASHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR COOPERATION (AP) 2. GP FOR AGRICULTURE (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking the following main relief:- “……to issue an order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Proceedings R.C.No.729/2016/B, dated 05.12.2017 passed by the 4th Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, discriminative, violative of principles of natural justice and Fundamental Rights of the Petitioner as guaranteed under Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to Section 115 (D)(2)(iv) of the Andhra Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, 1964 and Memo No.5825/Coop.III/2014-7, dated 23.05.2015 and consequently holding that the Petitioner is entitled to be cor tinued in service till the age of 60 years as per the Resolution of the Managing Committee of the 5th Respondent Society dated 20.11.2017, by setting aside the Proceedings R.C.No.729/2016/B, dated 05.12.2017 passed by the 4th Respondent, in the interests of justice and to pass……” 2. The sum and substance of the writ petition is that the petitioner is seeking extension of his services from 58 years to 60 years. 3. Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 4. Conversely, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Co-operation appearing for respondents submits that the writ petitioner had retired from service on 31.03.2019. 5. Even as per the version of the writ petitioner also, at the time of filing of the writ petition, he is aged about 58 years. In fact, the petitioner sought for continuation of his services up to the age of 60 years. However, due to efflux of time, petitioner would have already crossed 60 years of age long back. Admittedly, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 6. In these circumstances, by taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for co-operation appearing for respondents, the writ petition is closed. However, this order will not preclude the petitioner from taking recourse to law as permissible, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 25.07.2025 SRT 193 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.43432 of 2017 Date: 25.07.2025 SRT