APHC010835762017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [2597] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 35348/2017 Between: 1. VINAYA KUMAR AIDED HIGH SCHOOL, ANANTHAPURAM DIST, TELUGU MEDIUM, REP. BY ITS CORRESPONDENT, CHINMAYA NAGAR, PRASANNAIPALLI VILLAGE, RAPTHADU MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF AP GUNTUR DIST 3 OTHERS, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, VIJAYAWADA. 3. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR, SCHOOL EDUCATION, AT KADAPA. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT AT ANANTHAPURAM. ...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 toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in interfering with appointment to the post of Headmaster of the petitioner school by uploading persons to be promoted to the post of Headmaster, without taking into consideration that the said post is already filled and being officiated by the person appointed by the management of the minority educational institutions, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14 and 30(1) of the Constitution of 2 India and also in violation of the judgments of the Apex Court and consequently direct the respondent authorities not to interfere with the functioning of the petitioner school with regard to the filling up of post of Headmaster/Principal and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. J UGRANARASIMHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION (AP) The court made the following ORDER:- When the matter is called, Sri K. Mahadevan Kanthrigala, learned counsel representing learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the subsequent events taken place in the lis, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for further adjudication. Hence, the matter has become infructuous. 2. Recording the above said submission made, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 24.12.2025 GVK 3 58 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.35348 of 2017 Date: 24.12.2025 GVK