B. RATNAMMA D/O B. BHEEMANNA v. THE MEMBER SECRETARY,A.P.T.W.R.E.I.SOCIETY
WP/25776/2002 · 2025-09-18
Ravi Cheemalapati
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52859 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 52859 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010188512002
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 25776/2002 Between:
1. B. RATNAMMA D/O B. BHEEMANNA, D/O B. BHEEMANNA. R/O PATHIKOONDA, PATIKONDA POST, KURNOOL DISTRICT
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE MEMBER SECRETARY A P T W R E I SOCIETY, Educational institutions society. Telugu Samkshema Bhavan, Masab Tank, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENT 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 pass a direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent in not appointing the petitioner as post Graduate Teacher in its institution as illegal and arbitrary and further direct the respondent to appoint the petitioner as post Graduate Teacher in its institution and pass.
IA NO: 2 OF 2002(WPMP 32572 OF 2002 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 respondent to appoint the petitioner as post Graduate Teacher in the respondent institution
2
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. NANDIGAM KRISHNA RAO
2. P RAVI KIRAN Counsel for the Respondent:
1. ANITHA MESA (SC FOR APREIS TW SW BC)
2. GP FOR SOCIAL WELFARE
3. G SIMHADRI
3
The Court made the following order:
Though the matter is listed today under the caption ‘For Dismissal’, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. On earlier occasions also i.e., on 29.08.2025, 01.08.2025 and 07.07.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It shows that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting her case. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications are closed.
____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 19.09.2025 MP
4
692 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO:25776 of 2002 Date: 19.09.2025
MP