APHC010121792003 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: 18929/2003 Between: 1. SMT. B. RADHA, CHURCH ROAD, CHIRALA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. GOVT OF A P, (EDUCATION-C.E.II) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD. 3. V R S Y R N COLLEGE CHIRALA REP BY ITS SECRETARY, CORRESPONDENT, CHIRALA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. MR S KRISHNARJUNA RAO LECTURER P G DEPARTMENT OF, COMMERCE, V.R.S. & Y.R.N. COLLEGE, CHIRALA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. MR B SRINIVASA RAO LECTRUER, P.G. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, V.R.S. & Y.R.N. COLLEGE, CHIRALA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. MR A SATISH BABU LECTRURER P G DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, V.R.S. & Y.R.N. COLLEGE, CHIRALA, PRAKASAM 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 2 pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring that the G.O. Rt. No. 862 Higher Education (CE.II-I) Department dated 14.11.2002 as communicated by the 2nd respondent in Procs. RC. No. 5079/Admn.III-1/99 dated 17.07.2003 is illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and contrary to the order in W.P. No. 24473 of 1997 dated 01.09.2001 obtained by respondents 5 and 6 is the result of fraud and misrepresentation and not binding on the petitioner and consequently set aside G.O. Rt. No. 862 Higher Education (C.E. II-I) Department dated 14.11.2002 and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2003(WPMP 23691 OF 2003 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 suspend the operation of the G.O. Rt. No. 862 Higher Education (CE.II-I) Department dated 14.11.2002 issued by the 1st respondent and the consequential action by respondents 2 and 3 and pass such other appropriate order Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. D V SITARAMAMURTHY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. A MALATHI 2. P R PRASAD 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 11.09.2025 and 11.08.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It shows that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting her 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 4 194 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO:18929 of 2003 Date: 25.09.2025 MP