APHC010028262017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] FRIDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 20077/2017 Between: G.sree Rami Reddy and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep By Its Principal Secretary and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. D LINGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE (AP) 2. V R N PRASHANTH 3. Y SUDHAKAR 4. GP FOR FINANCE PLANNING (AP) The Court made the following: The writ petition is filed seeking writ of mandamus praying the following relief:- “……Declaring the action of the respondents in retiring the petitioners from service of the 3rd respondent Corporation at the age of fifty eight (58) years on the basis of impugned clarification issued in circular Memo.No. 4179/14/HRM 2 IV/2014 dated 2-7-2014 and impugned Ref. No. APMDC/HRD/HO/Retd.Intimation/2017/196 dated 6-5-2017 and Office Order APMDC/M'Pet/HRD/ Retirement/0677/ 2017-18, dated 1-6-2017 of the 4th & 5th respondents as being arbitrary, illegal, unjust, discriminatory, contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Public Employment (Regulation of Age of Superannuation) Act 1984 as amended from time to time and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and accordingly set aside the same and consequently hold that the petitioners are entitled to be continued in service upto the age of sixty (60) years with all consequential benefits in accordance with law and statutory prescription in this regard……” 2. The sum and substance in the present lis is that the petitioners are seeking continuation of their service in the respondents Corporation upto the age of 60 years. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is jointly submitted by Sri N. B. Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jeevan Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-Corporation, that the petitioners were retired from service on 30.06.2019 itself, on attaining superannuation age of 60 years. While making the submissions, they state that the cause in the lis does not survive for adjudication and seeks closure of the writ petition. 3. Recording the submissions made by both the counsel, the writ petition is closed as there no cause in the lis that has to be adjudicated anymore. 3 There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 11.07.2025 GVK 4 167 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.20077 of 2017 Date: 11.07.2025 GVK