APHC010593312024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI SMB FRIDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANi^HA SARMA WRIT APPEAL NO: 1068 OF 2024 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 28.11.2024 in WP No.30299 of 2014, on the file of the High Court. Between:^ 1. The Guntur Women Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd, Rep. by its Chief Executive, Near Municipal Complex, Guntur. ^ The President, Guntur Women Cooperative Urban Bank Ltd, Municipal Complex, Guntur. Near ...Petitioners AND /I. The Appellate Authority U/s 482 of The Andhra Pradesh Shops Establishment Act 1988 Joint Commissioner of Labour Hyderabad. / /2. Smt U Sharada, W/o U Subba Rao, Aged about 59 years, Occ Ex employee, R/o.48-11-16/2, Currency Nagar, Ramavarappadu Post, Vijayawada-520008. Twin Cities, ...Respondents lA NO: 1 OF 2024 0^ ■'“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 , suspend the operation of the orders passed in WP.No.30299 of 2014, dated 28.11.2024, pending disposal of the Writ Appeal. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI SUDHAKARA RAO AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: GP FOR SERVICES III Counsel for the Respondent No. 2: SRI SUDHAKARA RAO ALURI The Court made the following order: APHC010593312024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) SMB [3545] FRIDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA WRIT APPEAL NO: 1068/2024 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 28.11.2024 passed by the Single Judge in WP No.30299 of 2014 and direct the 1st respondent 2nd appellate authority to decide the Validity of Domestic Enquiry afresh and proceed further in the Second Appeal No. 11 of 2002 and pass Between: 1.THE GUNTUR WOMEN COOPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, NEAR MUNICIPAL COMPLEX, GUNTUR. GUNTUR WOMEN COOPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD. NEAR MUNICIPAL COMPLEX, GUNTUR. 2.. THE PRESIDENT >) ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1.THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY U/S OF THE ANDHRA PRADESH SHOPS, U/S 482 OF THE ANDHRA PRADESH SHOPS ESTABLISHMENT ACT 1988 JOINT COMMISSIONER OF LABOUR, TWIN CITIES, HYDERABAD. 2.SMT U SHARADA, W/O U SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC EX-EMPLOYEE, RAMAVARAPPADU POST, VIJAYAWADA-520008. R/0.48-11-16/2, CURRENCY NAGAR, ...RESPONDENT(S): lA NO: 1 OF 2024 2 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 Pleased to suspend the operation of the orders passed in WP.No.30299 of 2014, dated 28.11.2024, pending disposal of the Writ Appeal, and pass Counsel for the Appellant(S); 1.SUDHAKARA RAO AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR SERVICES III 2.SUDHAKARA RAO ALURI The Court made the following: \ 3 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND & THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA WRIT APPEAL No.1068 of 2024 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Battu Devanand) This Writ Appeal has been filed against the order, dated 28.11.2024 in W.P.No.30299 of 2014 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. 2. The appellants are petitioners and the respondents are respondents in W.P.No.30299 of 2014. 3. Both the parties in the Appeal will be referred to as they are arrayed in the Writ Petition for convenience. 4. Brief facts leading to file this writ appeal are herein under; (i) The 2^^ respondent was a former employee of the appellant bank and worked as Secretary of the Appellant Bank. After issuing several memos, the 2^^ respondent was placed under suspension vide proceedings, dated 10.10.1992. Pending disposal of that Writ Petition by the 2^^ respondent, the District Cooperative Officer appointed an enquiry officer under Section 52 of the AP Cooperative Societies Act. The enquiry officer found the order of the suspension dated 10.10.1992 as invalid and suggested reinstatement of the 2^^ Respondent into employment, (ii) The Petitioners instead of reinstating the 2'^^ respondent as Secretary demoted her as a clerk. Aggrieved by it, she filed W.P.No.43352 of 1993 and the Court suspended the proceedings. The petitioners bank instead of implementing the recommendations of enquiry officer, the bank extended 4 the suspension period by another two months. Aggrieved by it, the 2 respondent filed W.P.No.7547 of 1993 and the Court suspended the proceedings and the 2^^^ respondent was permitted to join as Secretary on 03.05.1993. nd nd (iii) The 2 respondent was again suspended on 23.03.1994. Aggrieved by it. she filed W.P.No.16937 of1994. She also filed another W.P.No.8262 of 1994 and the Court directed the appellants bank to wages and subsistence allowance but the said orders were not implemented and a domestic enquiry was conducted. The Enquiry Officer conducted exparte enquiry and submitted his report. The appellants bank removed the pay 2'" respondent from service with effect from 30.11.1996. She filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, (iv) The Assistant Commissioner of Labour after hearing the appeal passed order, dated 25.07.2000 by quashing the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer and the writ petitioners are directed to reinstate the 2 respondent with continuity of service and with full back wages and all attendant benefits within 30 days of the receipt of the said order. The petitioners challenged the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Labour in appeal before the 1®* respondent. The said appeal was kept pending for than 14 years and when the appeal was finally taken up for hearing for disposal, the petitioners came up with a memo which was considered as I.A. by the 1®* respondent seeking permission to adduce evidence. The 1®‘ respondent after hearing both sides dismissed the said memo and posted the appeal for final arguments to 19.09.2014. nd more 5. This writ appeal is taken up for final hearing on 11.08.2025. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants has brought to the notice of this Court that the Second Appeal No.11 of 2022 (old) which was numbered as S.A.No.1 of 2024 (new) was dismissed by the respondent appellate authority by order, dated 02.05.2025. The learned counsel for the appellants has placed a copy of the order, dated 02.05.2025 of the 1"* respondent. It is placed on record. The learned counsel further submits that against the order, dated 02.05.2025 in S.A.No.1 of 2024 of the 1"* respondent, the petitioners filed writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.14306 of 2025 and it is pending. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances and the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on either side, in view of the fact that the 1®‘ respondent being appellate authority has passed order, dated 02.05.2025 in S.A.No.1 of 2024 and the same was under challenge before this Court in W.P.No.14306 of 2025, in our considered view, nothing survives in this writ appeal for further adjudication. 7. Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous. 8. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- A VIJAYA BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. One CC to Sri. Sudhakara Rao Ambati Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri. Sudhakara Rao Aluri Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CCs to GP for Services III, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 4. Two CD Copies gsc / HIGH COURT DATED:10/10/2025 ORDER WANO. 1068 OF 2024 5( W OCT 2025 o r>i Co DISMISSING THE WA AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS