APHC010303422003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 21580/2003 Between: 1. GOLLA SRINIVASA RAO, S/O. KONDAIAH, R/O. BENERJIPET, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, VIDYUTH SOUDHA, SOMAJIGUDA, HYDERABAD. 2. A P EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED, REP. THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER OPERATION, ELECTRICAL, A P ESTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED, ESTERN STREEET, ELURU, WEST GODAVARI 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Writs, Order or Direction declaring and setting aside the proceedings dt 12.9.2003 in Lr.No.SE/O/ELR/Adm/F 137/D.No 478/03 on the file of third respondent, as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction by directing the third respondent to forthwith appoint the petitioner as L.D.C by taking into account the experience 2 certificate produced by the petitioner at the time of interview; Award costs and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2003(WPMP 26945 OF 2003 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 issue interim directions to the third respondent to forthwith consider the case of the petitioner afresh for appointment to the post of the L.D.C by taking into account the experience certificate produced by him at the time of interview, pending disposal of W P No. of 2003 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. K RAGHUVEER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL) 2. . 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 11.09.2025 and 11.08.2025, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It shows that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting his 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: 25.09.2025 MP 4 195 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO:21580 of 2003 Date: 25.09.2025 MP