APHC010501312007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 23342/2007 Between: 1. SRI RAMA MOHANA AYURVEDA DHARMA, VIJAYAWADA, VYDYASALA SANGHAM, VIJAYAWADA,BANDAR ROAD, BUCKINGHAMPET,POST,VIJAYAWADA,KRISHNA DIST, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY SRI T.V.NAVA KUMAR R/O.VIJAYAWADA ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS ANOTHER, KAKINADA,EAST GODAVARI DIST 2. P V R SARMA/SO BHAVANI SANKARAM, R/O.VIJAYAWADA,C/O.DEPUTY COMMISSIONER ENDOWMENTS, KAKINADA,EAST GODAVARI DIST ...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, order or direction(s) particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the impugned proceedings Rc.No.B2/10521/2005, Dt.14-06-2007 and Telegraphic Notice Dt.29-10-2007 issued by the Respondent No.1 herein is illegal, arbitrary and unsustainable and set aside the same as illegal, arbitrary and unsustainable pass such other order or orders IA NO: 1 OF 2007(WPMP 30416 OF 2007 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 operation of the impugned proceedings Rc.No.B2/10521/2005, dt.14- 6-2007 and Telegraphic Notice dt.29-10-2007 issued by the Respondent No.1 herein pending disposal of the wp IA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 leased to receive the counter copies on record by allowing the leave petition in the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P R PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR ENDOWMENTS The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 23342/2007 ORDER: Respondent No.1 vide proceedings dated 14.06.2007 directed the petitioner to admit respondent No.2 as Junior Assistant stating that the petitioner organization is parent institution. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.2 was working in Sri Rama Nagar Rupabayamma Trust, Vijayawada, and on his removal, he approached this Court and as the matter was not contested by respondent No.1, a direction was given to continue and pay his salary forthwith till he is posted in other institution which have funds to pay salaries. The said order has been assailed in the present writ petition solely on the ground that respondent No.2 was never a regular employee of the petitioner organization, he worked as NMR for three months in the year 1989 and later left the institution without any information. The petitioner institution has no resources to extend regular pay scales and all the employees working are drawing minimum wages and there is no vacant post available in the petitioner institution. Further case is that the respondents have no authority to transfer the employees of other institutions to the petitioner institution, as such, the order passed by respondent No.1 to appoint respondent No.2 as Junior Assistant without considering representation of the petitioner institution is wholly illegal, arbitrary, hence the present writ petition. 2. Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. There is no representation for the petitioner. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents on counter submitted that considering the request made by the petitioner institution, the orders issued by the Deputy Commissioner dated 14.06.2007 was modified and respondent No.2 has been posted to another institution i.e., Sri Rama Nagar Rupabayamma Trust, Vijayawada, and from there to Sri Kasi Visweswara Swamy Temple, Satyanarayanapuram, Vijayawada, and he was retired from service on 31.05.2013, as such, the cause in the writ petition has become infructuous, accordingly, prayed to dismiss the writ petition. 4. Perused the record. 5. Aggrieved by the proceedings issued by respondent No.1 vide Rc.No.B2/10521/2005 dated 14.06.2007, directing the petitioner to appoint respondent No.2 as Junior Assistant, the present writ petition is filed. A perusal of the counter would indicate that as per the request of the petitioner, respondent No.2 has been appointed in another institution and retired from service on 31.05.2013. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the averments made in the counter, the cause in the writ petition does not survive and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 15th September, 2025 RKS