Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50735 (AP)

Dr. P.S.V. Srinivasa Rao v. The Director of Technical Education

WP/12642/2013 · 2025-12-04

Subba Reddy Satti

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010198232013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 12642/2013 Between: 1. DR. P.S.V. SRINIVASA RAO, S/O SATYANARAYANA AGED 46 YEARS R/O B.V.S. NILAYAM, RANGU THOTA ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, B.R.K. BHAVAN, TANK BUND, HYDERABAD 2. RAO NAIDU ENGINEERING COLLEGE, SPONSORED BY SRI SAINADHA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ONGOLE (APPROVED BY AICTE AND AFFILIATED TO JNTU, KAKINADA) REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN 3. DR MALAKONDAIAH NAIDU, SECRETARY AND CORRESPONDENT RAO & NAIDU ENGINEERING COLLEGE ONGOLE, 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 or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order dated 19.01.2013 (Ex.P7) of the 3rd Respondent issued by and on behalf of the rd Respondent suspending Petitioner's services as Principal of Rao Et Naidu Engineering College, Ongole is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violative of principles of 2 natural justice and contrary to Article 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India as also Section 79 of A.P. Education Act, 1982 and the Rules made thereunder and consequently direct the Respondents to restore the services of the Petitioner as Principal of Rao Et Naidu Engineering College, Ongole with all attending benefits in the interests of justice and pass. IA NO: 1 OF 2013(WPMP 15580 OF 2013 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 to reinstate the Petitioner into service as Principal by suspending the operation of impugned order dated 19.01.2013 issued by the 3rd Respondent and pass. IA NO: 2 OF 2013(WPMP 48547 OF 2013 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 to reinstate the petitioner into duty forthwith pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of justice Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M PANDURANGA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION 2. Y V RAVI PRASAD The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: Sri Challa Hruday Raj, learned counsel representing Sri M.Panduranga Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and hence, the same is now rendered infructuous. 2. Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. 3 As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed. ______________________ SUBBA REDDY SATTI, J Dated: 05.12.2025 SNI 4 309 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION No.12642 of 2013 Dated: 05.12.2025 SNI