Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 44962 (AP)

P.V.S. Naidu v. State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/21102/2018 · 2025-03-23

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

Special Leave Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 21102 OF 2018 Between: P.V.S. Naidu, S/o. P. Venku Naidu, Aged about 57 years, Govada, Chodavaram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District, PIN - 531023. ...Petitioner^ AND State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Industries and Commerce (Sugar and IFR) Department A.P. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. The Director of Sugar and Cane Commissioner, Govt, of Andhra Pradesh, Guntur. The Chodavaram Coop. Sugars Ltd, Govada, Chodavaram Mandal, Visakhapatnam District. Rep. by its Managing Director. 1. ? 2. 3. ...Respondents-- 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Orders, Direction or Directions to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in superannuating the petitioner on completion of 58 years with effect from 30.06.2018 as illegal, unreasonable and unconstitutional on account of the G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance (HR.IV-FR) Department dated / 08.0§,.2D17 and the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) ■ '■ N6.t362!3 of 2017 dated 09.08.2017 and to issue a consequential direction 6|^hHnuqJhb petitioner in service upto completion of 60 years of age with a+t qinseqOen^l benefits. ^ tq * IA NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 3rd Respondent to continue the petitioner in service as Engineer on consolidated pay upto attainment of age of 60 years as per G.O.Ms.No.138 Finance (HMV-FR) Department dated 08.08.2017 and the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 13623 of 2017 dated 09.08.2017, pending disposal of the Writ petition. ^ Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. VEDULA SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1&2: GP FOR INDUSTRIES COMMERCE Counsel for the Respondent No. 3: SRI T BALAJI The Court made the following order: APHC010448732018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 21102 OF 2018 Between; P.v.s. Naidu ...PETITIONER AND State of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT{S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VEDULA SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.T BALAJI 2.GP FOR INDUSTRIES COMMERCE (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “...to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ Oi rders Direction or Directions to declare the action of the indent in superannuating the petitioner on completion of 58 ye dffect from 30.06.2018 as illegal unreasonable and unconstitutk 'count of the G.O.Ms.No.138, Finance (HR.IV-FR) Department de 12017 and the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court C).No.13623 of 2017 dated 09.08.2017 and to issue a consequei Ion to continue the petitioner in service upto completion of 60 ye 9 with all consequential benefits and pass... ” 2. Heard Ms.P.Lakshmi Priya Anvitha. learned counsel representing Sri Vedula Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Industries Commerce on behalf of the respondents is in attendance. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition be disposed of since the relief has become infructuous in this matter. 4. Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed, since, the relief has become infructuous. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. may "*=^strar / //TRUE COPY// Sd/-M RAIWESH BABU °^p^J^egistrar To, SE 1. One CC to Sri. Vedula Srinivas Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri. T Balaji Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to GP For Industries and Commerce, Hi^fjjQourt Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies GSC !e ^ ^ I . HIGH COURT DATE0:24/03/2025 ORDER vfUL 2025 ^ ^ Curreni iiection . a;- m! O WP.No.21102 of 2018 o> DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS