[ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 10556 OF 2013 Between: 1. M. Ravi Naik, S/o. M.Peddireddy Naik Aged 29 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, Garnimitta, Piler Division, Chittoor District. 2. M.Balaji, S/o. Sammaiah, Aged 41 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, South Section, Tirupati. 3. D.Rajanna, S/o. D.Peddanna, Aged 42 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, Rajivnagar, Tirupati. 4. K.Venkatesh, S/o. K.Dora Swamy, Aged 27 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, Mangalam-I, Tirupati. 5. B.Gangadharan, S/o. B.Venkataramana, Aged 30 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, Operation Division, West, Tirupati. 6. B.Venkatesu, S/o. B.Nagaiah, Aged 41 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, B.N.Kandriga, Srikalahasti. 7. P.Dhananjeyudu, S/o. P.Krishnaiah, Aged 42 years, Occ: JLM,^ APSPDCL, Vedurukuppam, Puttur, Chittoor District. 8. S.Krishna Murthy, S/o. Siddaiah, Aged 40 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, MRT, Tirupati. 9. G.Murgesh, S/o. G.Radhakrishna, Aged 29 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, Byreddypalli, Chittoor. H.Perumal, S/o. H.Reddappa, Aged 40 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, Byreddypalli, Chittoor. B. Girl Nayak, S/o. B.Gangi Nayak, Aged 32 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, Y.V.Palem, Piler, Chittoor District. 10. 11. -it P.Gopi, S/o. P.Ananda, Aged 33 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, Gurramkonda, Piler Division, Chittoor District. P.Sivasankaraiah, S/o. P.Venkatadri, aged 39 years, Occ; JLM, APSPDCL, Somala, Piler Division, Chittoor District. B.Venkataramana, S/o. B.Ramanappa, Aged 39 years, Occ: JLM, ■?. APSPDCL, Molakalacheruvu, Madanapalli, Chittoor District. C.Venkatramana, s/o. C.Venkataswamy, aged 41 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, B.Kothakota, Madanapalli Division, Chittoor District. J.Venkataramana, S/o. Venkatappa, Aged 39 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, PTM Section, Madanapalli, Chittoor District. B.Thirupal Naik, S/o. Ramla Naik, aged 36 years, Occ: JLM, APSPDCL, Molakalacheruvu, Chittoor District. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. ...Petitioners AND 1. Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P. Ltd,, Renigunta Road, Tirupathi, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director. 2. The Superintending Engineer, Operations, APSPDCL, Tirupathi 3. The Divisional Engineer (Operations), APSPDCL, Madanapalli, Chittoor District 4. The Divisional Engineer (MRT), APSPDCL, Tirupathi. 5. The Divisional Engineer (Operations), APSPDCL, Tirupathi Town, Tirupathi 6. The Divisional Engineer (Operations), APSPDCL, Chittoor. ...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 an order, direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the Memos issued to the Writ Petitioners DE E/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/U1 /D. No. DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/U11D. No. herein vide (1) 147/13, dated 11-2-2013 (2) 141/13 dated 11-2-2013 (3) f DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 142/13, dated 11-2-2013 DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 146/13, dated 11-2-2013 (5) DEE/MRT/TPT/JAO/ADM/F.Doc/D,No.230/13, dated 12-2-2013 (6) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 138/13, dated 11-2-2013 (7) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 145/13, dated 11-2-2013 (8) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 140/13, dated 11-2-2013 (9) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 189/13, dated 11-2-2013 (10) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAOfUI/D.No. 139/13, dated 11-2-2013 (11) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 143/13, dated 11-2-2013 (12) DEE/O/CTR/IJAO/ADM/F.Doc/ D.No. 525/13, dated 11-2-2013 (13) DEE/MRT/TPT/JAO/ADM/F.Doc./D.No. 228/13, dated 12-2-2013 (14) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 144/13, dated 11-2-2013 (15) DEE/0/MPL/JAO/ADM/S2/F.Con/D.No. 3/2013, dated 12-2-2013 (16) DEE/MRT/TPT/JAO/ADM/F.Doc./D.No. 227/13, dated 12-2-2013 and (17) DEE/O/MPL/JAO/ADM/S2/F.Con./D.No.4/2013, dated 12-2-2013 respectively as illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the said proceedings I.A. NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP. NO: 13093 OF 2013) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated iri the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the Fligh Court may be pleased to suspend the Memos issued to the Writ Petitioners herein vide Memo Nos. (4) I (1) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 147/13, dated 11-2-2013 (2) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/U1 /D.No. 141/13 dated 11-2-2013 (3) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/U 1/D.No. 142/13, dated 11-2-2013 (4) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/U 1/D.No. 146/13, dated 11-2-2013 (5) DEE/MRT/TPT/JAO/ADM/F. Doc/D. No.230/13, dated 12-2-2013 (6) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/U 1/D.No. 138/13, dated 11-2-2013 (7) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/U 1/D.No. 145/13, dated 11-2-2013 (8) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 140/13, dated 11-2-2013 (9) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/U 1/D.No. 189/13, dated 11-2-2013 (10) DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAOfUI/D.No. 139/13, dated 11-2-2013 (11) / p DEE/0/TPT/ADM/JAO/U1/D.NO. DEE/O/CTR/iJAO/ADM/F.Doc/ D.No. DEE/MRT/TPT/JAO/ADM/F.Doc./D.No. DEE/O/TPT/ADM/JAO/UI/D.N0. 144/13, dated DEE/0/MPL/JAO/ADM/S2/F.Con/D.No. 3/2013, dated DEE/MRT/TPT/JAO/ADM/F.Doc./D.No. 227/13, dated 12-2-2013 and (17) dated 12-2-2013 143/13, dated 11-2-2013 (12) 525/13, dated 11-2-2013 (13) 228/13, dated 12-2-2013 (14) 11-2-2013 (15) 12-2-2013 (16) DEE/O/MPL/JAO/ADM/S2/F.Con./D.No.4/2013, respectively Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI K UDAYA SRI Counsel for the Respondents: VENKATA RAMANA RAO KOTA (SC FOR APSPDCL) Counsel for the Respondents: rV R REDDY KOWURI (SC FOR APSPDCL) The Court made the following: ( V,-- w APHC010612462013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3330] / sS-S / / PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 10556/2013 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) M. Ravi Naik and others AND Southern Power Distribution Company of A.P.Ltd ...RESPONDENT(S) and others Counsel for the Petitioner(S); 1,K UDAYA SRI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1 .VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL 2.V R REDDY KOVVURI(SC FOR APSPDCL) i / 3.- I The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO.10556 of 2013 RAO ORDER: Despite the matter listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there IS no representation for the petitioners. It evinces that the petitioners have no interest in prosecuting their Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed for There shall be no order as to costs. case. \ \ non-prosecution. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous Petitions shall stand closed. pending, if any, A CO. vija/ababu ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Sd/- A. //TRUE COPY// To. SECTION OFFICER One CC to SRI K UDAYA SRI Advocate ^2. One CC to SRI VENKATA RAMANA [OPUC] One CC to SRI V R REDDY KOWURI 4. Three CD Copies Ksr (gsg) [OPUC] RAO KOTA, (SC for APSPDCL) . (SC for APSPDCL) [OPUC] \ 4 HIGH COURT \ \ \ PATED; 25/04/2025 ORDER yVP.No.10556 Of 2013 O t/cj g 2 * SfP 2025 m:9 ^ Current Secuon ★ DISMISSING THE WP FOR NON WITHOUT COSTS PROSECUTION i