APHC010497312006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 7885/2006 Between: 1. R. SRAVAN KUMAR, NELLORE., S/O. R. NAGESHWER RAO DOOR NO. 26-3-1591, CHANDRAMOULI NAGAR, 4TH CROSS ROAD, A.K. NAGAR, NELLORE. ...PETITIONER AND 1. GENERAL MANAGER PINAKINI GRAMEENA BANK 5 OTHERS, HEAD OFFICE, A.K. NAGAR, NELLORE-524 004. 2. THE SELECTION COMMITTEE PINAKINI GRAMEENA BANK, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, PINAKINI GRAMEENA BANK, NELLORE. 3. BODDULURI VENKATESHWARLU, SWEEPAR CUM MESSENGER, PINAKINI GRAMEENA BANK, BALLIKURUVA BRANCH, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. ELSAIAH SWEEPAR CUM MESSENGER, PINAKINI GRAMEENA BANK, CHERLA, NELLORE. 5. M VENKAT KUMAR SWEEPAR CUM MESSENGER, PINAKINI GRAMEENA BANK, MARRIPADU BRANCH, NELLORE. 6. MANDAPATI BABU SWEEPAR CUM MESSENGER, PINAKINI GRAMEENA BANK, SINGARAYAKONDA, 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 pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus under Article 226 constitution of India, declaring the action of respondents 1 & 2 in not absorbing the petitioner in to regular vacancy as per the panel prepared in the year 2004 basing on his seniority cum merit as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and against the settled principles of law and consequently set aside the selection and appointment of respondents 3 to 6 vide circular No. 031/PSD/05/2006 dt. 27-2-2006 by directing the Respondent No. 1 & 2 to appoint the petitioner as Sweeper cum Messenger in the sanctioned vacancy w.e.f. 27.2.2006 with all consequential benefits and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. IA NO: 1 OF 2006(WPMP 10095 OF 2006 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 respondents 1 & 2 to engage the petitioner as part time sweeper cum messenger at B.Grahmanakraka Branch, jaladanki Mandal, or any other branch instead of engaging new candidates pending disposal of the writ petition and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C VANI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 7885/2006 ORDER: Smt.C.Vani Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner appearing through virtual mode submitted that the petitioner is not in contact with her for a long time and she has no instructions in the matter. 2. Since the matter pertains to the year 2006, the party should invariably be in contact with his advocate, however, in the present case, the petitioner had not been pursuing the case through his advocate, it shows that the petitioner had no interest in pursuing the matter. Hence, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. 3. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. However, if the petitioner feels that the cause still survives, he can file appropriate application within a period of two (02) months. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 26th September, 2025 RKS