Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 42603 (AP)

J.D.J. KATAKSHAM v. PRL. SECY. SCHOOL EDN. & 4 ORS.

WP/37269/2017 · 2025-12-30

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010835592017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 37269/2017 Between: 1. J.D.J. KATAKSHAM, S/O. J. GEORGE, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC: HEAD MASTER INCHARGE, H.M.M. HIGH SCHOOL, RAILWAY KODUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. PRL SECY SCHOOL EDN 4 ORS, - SCHOOL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS,VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, IBRAHIMPATNAM,KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, KADAPA,ANDHRA PRADESH STATE. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER YSR, KADAPADISTRICT,KADAPA. 5. SMT R PADMAJA, SENIOR TEACHER, HMM HIGH SCHOOL, RAILWAY KODUR, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...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 an appropriate writ more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th Respondent District Educational Officer in not processing the Pay Bills of the HMM High School presented by the Petitioner as the Head Master of the Institution and on the other hand entertaining the Pay Bills presented by the 5th Respondent as being arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the Judgment of this Hon'ble High Court in W.A.No.962 of 2011and also contrary to the proceedings of the 3rd Respondent in RC.No.2838/B4/2009 dated 04-12-2012 and consequently direct the 4th Respondent to treat the Petitioner as the Head Master of HMM High School and issue such other writ 2 or order or direction as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CH SAMSON BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION (AP) The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 37269/2017 Order: This Instant Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following main prayer: “….to issue an appropriate writ more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th Respondent- District Educational Officer in not processing the Pay Bills of the HMM High School presented by the Petitioner as the Head Master of the Institution and on the other hand entertaining the Pay Bills presented by the 5th Respondent as being arbitrary, illegal , contrary to the Judgment of this Hon'ble High Court in W.A.No.962 of 2011 and also contrary to the proceedings of the 3rd Respondent in RC. No.2838/B4/2009 dated 04-12-2012 and consequently, direct the 4th Respondent to treat the Petitioner as the Head Master of HMM High School.” 2. The principle grievance of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent is not processing the pay bills for release of Grant-in- Aid in respect of HMM High School, as presented by the petitioner. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri V. Adinarayana, learned Assistant Government Pleader for School Education, placed on record a letter dated 30.12.2025 submitted by the Correspondent, HMM High School, Railway Kodur, Annamayya District, addressed to the District Education Officer, Kadapa, wherein it is stated that the bills relating to the 4 petitioner, namely J. D. J. Kataksham, were already claimed by the Management and that the petitioner is also drawing pension every month. It is also stated that there are no pending bills or arrear bills from the Management side payable to the petitioner. The said letter is taken on record and made as part of the record. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submitted that the petitioner retired from service in the year 2023. 5. Taking the above facts and circumstances into consideration, this Court is of the opinion that the cause in the writ petition does not survive for further adjudication. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Date:31.12.2025 ARB/JAK 5 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM 72 WRIT PETITION NO:37269 of 2017 Date:31.12.2025 ARB/JAK