\ IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 40100 OF 2018 Between: M. Pedda Tripuraiah, S/o Benjiman, Aged 37 years, Occ; Multi Purpose Worker (MPW), A.P. Residential School, Ganapavaram Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, School A.P. Secretariat, Amaravathi, Education (TRG) Department, Velagapudi, Thulluru Mandal, Guntur District, A.P. 2. The A.P. Residential Educational Institutions Society (APREIS), Rep. by its Secretary, 3rd and 4th Floors, Pamulapati Sivaiah Complex, Naidupeta, Koritipadu, Guntur City and District, A.P. 3. The Principal, A.P. Residential School, Ganapavaram Village and Mandal, Prakasam District, A.P. ...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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent suddenly in not allowing the petitioner to his regular duty as Multi Purpose Worker (MPW) since 12-06-2018 without prior notice or order and violating the order dated 13-04-2016 in WP No. 12190 of 2016 of this Honourable Court and the compliance Proceedings in Rc.No. 29290/A1-3/2016, dated a 21-05-2016 of the 2nd respondent as biased, illegal and void and consequently direct the respondents herein to continue the petitioner in the 3rd respondents school as Multi Purpose Worker (MPW) in the light of the above order dated 13-04-2016 in WP No. 12190 of 2016 of this Honourable Court and the approved compliance Proceedings in Rc.No. 29290/A1- 3/2016, dated 21-05-2016 of the 2nd respondent to justice. secure the ends of \A NO: 1 OF 2018 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filedjn support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 3rd respondent herein to allow the petitioner on duty as Multi Purpose Worker (MPW) as earlier and continue him in the said post in the 3rd respondents school in the interest of justice, pending disposal of above WP No. of 2018. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI GADE VENKATESWARA RAO (NOT PRESENT) Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: SMT. ANITHA MESA (SC FOR APREIS) Counsel for the Respondent No.3: — The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010831282018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT the honourable dr justice VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 4Q10n/7ni« Between: M. Pedda Tripuraiah ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.GADE VENKATESWARA RAO ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION (AP) 2,ANITHA mesa (SC FOR APREIS TW SW BC) The Court made the following: ORDER: 6 This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution the following prayer for: of India with '...to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent suddenly in not allowing the petitioner to his regular duty as Multi Purpose Worker (MPW) since 12.06.2018 without prior notice or order and violating the order dated 13.04.2016 in WP No. 12190 of 2016 of this Honourable Court and the compliance Proceedings in Rc. No. 29290/A13/2016 dated 21.05.2016 of the 2nd respondent as biased illegal and void and consequently direct the respondents herein to continue the petitioner in w 2 the 3rd respondents school as Multi Purpose Worker MPW in the light of the above order dated 13.04.2016 in WP No 12190 of 2016 of this Honourable Court and the approved compliance Proceedings in Rc. No. 29290/A13/2016 dated 21.05.2016 of the 2nd respondent to secure the ends of justice and pass...” None represented on behalf of the Petitioner. The Proceeding Sheet 2. dated 30.04.2025, also shows none represented for the Petitioner and it was also submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.2 that the Petitioner is not working in their Society for the last two (2) years. The Matter is directed to be listed today under the caption “for dismissal”. Despite the matter is listed under the caption “for dismissal” in the list today, none represented the matter. It appears they have no interest in prosecuting the matter. In that view, the Writ Petition is dismissed for Non-prosecution . No order 3. as to Costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- //TRUE COPY// assistant [gisToFFlCER SEC To, 1. One CC to Sri Gade Venkateswara Rao Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for School Education, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 3. One CC to Smt. Anitha Mesa (SC for APREIS) Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies TF / HIGH COURT DATED:02/05/2025 ORDER AND^ WP.No.40100 of 2018 S 0 8 SEP 2025 m CO DISMISSING THE W.P. FOR NON-PROSECUTION, WITHOUT COSTS