APHC010087622007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 21928/2007 Between: 1. A. BAPI RAJU, E.G. DISTRICT, S/O. SUBBA RAJU, SECRETARY (UNDER SUSPENSION) CHINTALAPALLI PACS, CHINTALAPALLI, RAZOLE MANDAL, E.G. DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE COMMISSIONWER FOR COOPERATION HYDERABAD 3 OTHERS, REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVERNMENT OF A.P., HYDERABAD. 2. THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE OFFICER, E.G. DISTRICT AT KAKINADA. 3. THE DIVISIONAL COOPERATIVE OFFICER, AMALAPURAM, E.G. DISTRICT 4. THE CHINTALAPALLI PACS, CHINTAPALLI, RAZOLE MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT REP BY ITS PRESIDENT ...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 toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned action of the respondents in continuing the petitioner under suspension from 10-8-2005 i.e. for more than 2 years as highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and consequently set aside the impugned proceedings dated 10-8-2005 of the 4th respondent with all consequential benefits and pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice. IA NO: 1 OF 2007(WPMP 28425 OF 2007 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 direct the respondents to pay the subsistence allowances @ 75% after expiry of 6 months from the date of impugned suspension order dated 10-8-2005 as per the service regulations pending disposal of the writ petition, and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2007(WPMP 28426 OF 2007 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 direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner by suspending the impugned proceedings dated 10-8-2005 issued by the 4th respondent pending disposal of the writ petition, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. EATHAKOTA VENKATA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. T V S PRABHAKARA RAO 2. GP FOR COOPERATION The Court made the following: ORDER: Sri T.V.S.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and has become infructuous. 2. Sri Eathakota Venkata Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not in contact with him for a long time and he has no instructions in the matter. 3. Since the matter pertains to the year 2007, the party should invariable be in contact with his advocate, however, in the present case, the petitioner had not been pursuing the case through his advocate, it shows that the petitioner had no interest in prosecuting the matter. Hence, the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. However, if the petitioner feels that the cause still survives, he can file appropriate application within a period of two (02) months. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. _____________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI Date: 15th September, 2025 RKS