APHC010383392004 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 14410/2004 Between: 1. P. RAMAKRISHNA RAO, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT., S/O. LATE ARJUNA, RETD. MANDAL REVENUE OFFICER, SITAMPETA AND PRESENTLY R/O. 6-115, NEW COLONY, KANAPAKA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT-535 003. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE GOVT OF A P REVENUE DEPARTMENT AND 3 OTHERS, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYD. 2. THE DY DIRECTOR TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, GOVT OF A.P., MASAB TANK, HYD. 3. THE COLLECTOR DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, VIZIANAGARAM. 4. THE STATEION HOUSE OFFICER, I TOWN P.S., VIZIANAGARAM. ...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 toIssue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Certiorari calling for the records relating to and connected with the G.O.Rt.No.2264, Revenue (Vig.II) Department, Dt. 29.11.2003 of the 1st respondent and quash the same in so far as inflicting the punishment of 20% cut in the pension by holding it as being illeal, arbitrary and are violative mandatory provisions of the A.P Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward Clases Regulatisation of Issue of Community Certificate Act.1993. IA NO: 1 OF 2004(WPMP 18557 OF 2004 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 Order suspend the operation of the G.O.Rt.No.2264, Revenue (Vig.II) Department, dt. 29.11.2003 of the 1st respondent in so far as inflicting the punishment of 20% cut in the pension including the initiation and continuation of the criminal proceedings against the Petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Y VISWESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: On 16.03.2020, there was no representation for the petitioner and the matter has been listed for dismissal. Despite such direction, the matter was not listed under the caption for dismissal. Today also, there is no representation for the petitioner. It shows that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 22nd September, 2025 RKS