Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40999 (AP)

A.Venkata Ratna Govinda Rao, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary

WP/43223/2017 · 2025-12-19

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010945592017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] SATURDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 43223/2017 Between: A.Venkata Ratna Govinda Rao, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its Principal Secretary and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. S SASIKALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR EDUCATION (AP) 2. The Court Made the Following Order:- This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief: “to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in not promoting the Petitioner as a Principal in APR School at Achithapuram or in any other place w.e.f. 2 24-03-2017 with all consequential benefits as unjust, illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India as well as violation of service regulations of APREI Society and consequently direct the respondents to promote the Petitioner as a Principal in APR School w.e.f. 24-03-2017 with all consequential reliefs and benefits such as revising the seniority list, payment of monetary benefits.” 2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that on 24.03.2017, the petitioner was promoted as Principal of A.P. Residential School, Achutapuram. Thereafter, on 31.03.2017, he retired from service. Therefore, no further orders are required in this matter. 4. In view of the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2, the grievance of the petitioner stands addressed. Since the matter pertains to the year 2017 and there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no orders as to costs. 3 As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. _____________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM,J 20.12.2025. Asr 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO.43223 of 2017 20.12.2025 Asr