Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 46264 (AP)

CH.KRISHNAIAH, v. REGIONAL MANAGER,VIJAYWADA,APSRTC,KRISHNA,

WP/19563/2002 · 2025-09-24

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010435482002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 19563/2002 Between: 1. CH.KRISHNAIAH,, S/O ROSHAIAH CONDUCTOR (E. NO. 351280), THIRUVUR DEPOT, APSRTC, POST & MANDAL- THIRUVUR, KRISHNA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. REGIONAL MANAGER VIJAYWADA APSRTC KRISHNA, APSRTC., VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT 2. THE DEPOT MANAGER, A.P.S.R.T.C.., THIRUVUR, KRISHNA 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 a writ or order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus i) declaring the action of the respondents in not granting the petitioner the special grade increment with effect from 18-1-1999, as illegal and arbitrary ii) Consequently direct the respondents to grant special grade increment to the petitioner with effect from January 1999, duly granting all other consequential benefits, and pass. IA NO: 1 OF 2002(WPMP 24580 OF 2002 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 2 direct the respondents to consider petitioner's case for granting special grade increment forthwith, pending disposal of the Writ Petition and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K VASUDEVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. P DURGA PRASAD SC FOR APSRTC 3 The Court made the following order: Though the matter is listed today under the caption ‘For Dismissal’, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. On earlier occasions also i.e., on 28.08.2025 and 24.07.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It shows that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting his case. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications are closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 25.09.2025 MP 4 163 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO:19563 of 2002 Date: 25.09.2025 MP