APHC010032152018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 1443/2018 Between: M. Raghava Rao, ...PETITIONER AND The Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. K SARVA BHOUMA RAO 2. JOSYULA BHASKARA RAO(SC FORCENTRL GOVT) 3. DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA 4. VIVEK CHANDRA SEKHAR S The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “.... to issue an order / direction or any appropriate writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the Show Cause Notice No.EDW/119802 Dt. 29.05.2015 issued by the 3rd respondent just two days prior to the date of petitioners retirement from service on 31.05.2015 on attaining the age of superannuation alleging negligence in performing duties as a member of a technical committee constituted to finalize the parameters for assessing performance of trial conveyor belts in Visakhapatnam Steel Plant and further action of respondents in not finalizing the disciplinary proceedings in spite of submitting explanation Dtd.24.06.2015 as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, in violation of Articles of 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, set aside the same directing the respondents herein to forthwith release all the retirement benefits of the petitioner with interest 24 percent pa.” 2 2. The earlier Docket Proceedings would show that none represented for the Petitioner and the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption “For Dismissal”. 3. Despite the matter being listed under the caption “For dismissal”, none represented for the Petitioner today. 4. Sri Josyula Bhaskara Rao, learned Senior Panel Counsel for Central Government appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri S.Vivek Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of learned Deputy Solicitor General of India on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 are in attendance. 5. In that view, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 1443 of 2018 25.03.2025 Mjl /*