APHC010475502012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] FRIDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 39107/2012 Between: 1. V.V.NAGESH,, S/O.VENKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,OCC: CONDUCTOR, APSRTC, E.700178, RESIDING NEAR VIDYADEEP SCHOOL, OPPOSITE JAIN MANDIR, NIDADAVOLU, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE APSRTC, Represented by its Depot Manager, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District ...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 toto issue a Writ or Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, declaring the action of the respondent herein ; i) in issuing the suspension order dt 27.08.2012 suspending the petitioner from his services ; ii) issuing the charge charge sheet dt.27.08.2012, ii) in proceeding with the departmental enquiry even without waiting for the outcome of the Criminal case in Crime No. 93/2012 on the file of the Hon'ble II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Eluru, W.G. District, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violation of Art.14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the Judgment and guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in AIR 1988 SC 2118 Kusheshwar Dube Vs. Bharath Cooking Coal Limited and AIR 1999 SC 1416 M.Paul Anthony (Captain) Vs. Bharath Gold Mines Ltd. and consequently direct the respondent to raise the supsension of the petitioner IA NO: 1 OF 2012(WPMP 49635 OF 2012 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 stay all further proceedings in pursuance of the charge sheet bearing . No.01/118(2)/12/RJY, dt.27.08.2012 issued by the respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B SHIVA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent: 1. The Court made the following: Since there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner when the matter was listed 31.10.2025, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal’. 2. Despite the writ petition being listed today under the caption ‘for dismissal’, there is no representation for the petitioner either in the forenoon or in the afternoon. It seems the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the writ petition. 3. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 07.11.2025 IKN THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 39107 of 2012 Date: 07.11.2025 IKN