APHC010061592007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION No.4905 OF 2007 Between: 1. Yantrapati Venkateswarlu, S/o.Krishna Murthy, age: 43 years, Occ:Junior Assistant, O/o.Prohibition and Excise Station, Nellore, and others. ...Petitioners AND 1. M.Agamaiah, S/o. .. and age not known, Occ:Prohibition and Excise Sub. Inspector, (under orders of reversion) SHO, Siddipet, Medak District, and others. ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners : Mr.G.Venkata Krishnaiah Counsel for the Respondents: G.P. for Services – I Mr.D.Linga Rao Mr.M.M. Ali Mr.G.Sanjay Kumar The Court made the following ORDER: (per Hon’ble NJS,J) The learned counsel for the petitioners appeared through online. Mr.R.S.Manidhar Pingali, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services–I represented the respondent Nos.2 to 5. Mr.N.B.Chandra Sekhar, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the respondent No.9/Mr.R.Kameshwara Rao, through online. 2 WP_4905_2007 2. The writ petition is filed against the orders dated 30.6.2005 in O.A. No.9931 of 2002 on the file of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad. A Full Bench of the Tribunal disposed of the said O.A., along with connected O.As., declaring that the Constables working in Excise Department does not fall under last grade service under the A.P. Last Grade Services. 3. At the time of considering the writ petition for admission, a Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad by an order dated 15.3.2007 granted status quo for a period of three (3) weeks. Subsequently, WVMP No.2200 of 2008 came up for consideration and by an order dated 16.7.2008 the Vacate Stay Petition and WPMP No.6276 of 2007, wherein status quo order was granted were dismissed on the premise that the order of status quo was not extended, as such no interim order is subsisting and thus the Vacate Stay Petition has become infructuous. Be that as it may. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners appearing through online states that during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioners retired from service. 5. In view of the above stated position, nothing survives for adjudication and the writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA,J _____________________________ TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA,J October 13, 2025 vasu