APHC010154222003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 24706 of 2003 Bench Sr.No:-55 [3506] P. Kanakasundara Rao ...Petitioner Vs. State of A P, rep. by its Secretary, Education Department & two others. ...Respondent(s) ********** Advocate for Petitioner: Mr.V PADMANABHA RAO Advocate(s) for Respondent(s): , GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION, P RAJASEKHAR CORAM : SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 21th November 2025 ORDER: Present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing proceedings dated 03.11.2003 requesting the 3rd respondent in conducting enquiry against the petitioner alone leaving the 3rd respondent though grave allegations are against the 3rd respondent in accordance with the Rules framed under Sections 79, 80 and 83 of the A.P. Education Act, 1982, communicated in G.O.Ms.No.467, dated 03.11.1983, duly appointing the Enquiry Officer, is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, contrary to the Sections 79 80 and 83 of A P Education Act, 1982, and in violation of Article 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Proceedings in Rc No 4241/B1/2002 dt 03 11 2003 issued by the 2nd respondent and to pass such other order…” 2. There was no interim order granted at the time of issuance of notice to the respondents. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after issuance of the impugned proceedings, petitioner has not been further communicated with any notice or action proposed, much less as mentioned in the impugned proceedings. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents also are not in a position to state as to whether any further steps have been initiated against the petitioner, despite on last occasion informing that the petitioner has been subsequently terminated, no such termination order has been placed on record. 5. Since the impugned proceedings only proposes to conduct an enquiry, in case any further proceedings have been initiated in pursuance to the same, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge such proceedings if at all the same has adverse consequences. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending consideration, if any in this case, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN Date:21.11.2025. cs