APHC010485382024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3573] MONDAY, THE 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 25123/2024 Between: 1. V M VENKATA RAMANA REDDY, S/O. LATE V.M.SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, YERRAGUNTIA NAGARA PANCHAYAT, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MA AND UD DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, A.P., MANGALGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, VIJAYAWADA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, VIAJAYWADA, KRISHNA DIST. ...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 appropriate Writ order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the impugned order of the 2nd Respondent bearing Procgs.No.2495705/2024/M4-48, dated 22/09/2024 and consequential order of the 3rd Respondent bearing Rc.No.Cl-114814/2024- E.No.69924, dated 23/10/2024, though the petitioner is not completed one year of service in the present station and not given his willingness for transfer and transferring the petitioner from Vijayawada Municipal Corporation to Yerraguntla Municipality is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and void being 2 contrary to guidelines issued under G.O.Ms.No.75 Finance (HR.I-PLG and Policy) Dept., dated 17/08/2024 and consequential Circular of the 2nd Respondent bearing Memo.No.2532904/2024/Ml, dated 21/08/2024 and set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents to continue the petitioner as Town Planning Officer at Vijayawada Municipal Corporation with all consequential benefits, as otherwise the petitioner will be put to heavy and irreparable loss and to pass. IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 continue the petitioner as Town Planning Officer at Vijayawada Municipal Corporation by suspending the operation of the impugned order of the 2"^ Respondent bearing Procgs.No.2495705/2024/M4-48, dated 22/09/2024 and consequential order of the 3'^^ Respondent Rc.No.Cl-114814/2024- E.No.69924, dated 23/10/2024 bearing pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner herein/Respondent No.3 in the Writ Petition No. 25123 of 2024 to file counter affidavit in the above Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RANGARAJULA RAJASEKHARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP MUNCIPAL ADMN AND URBAN DEV AP 2. S.V.S.S.SIVARAM SC For VMC The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: …to issue a appropriate Writ order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the impugned order of the 2nd Respondent bearing Procgs.No.2495705/2024/M4-48, dated 22/09/2024 and consequential order of the 3rd Respondent bearing Rc.No.Cl- 114814/2024-E.NO.69924, dated 23/10/2024, though the petitioner is not completed one year of service in the present station and not given his willingness for transfer and transferring the petitioner from Vijayawada Municipal Corporation to Yerraguntla Municipality is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and void being contrary to guidelines issued under G.O.Ms.No.75 Finance (HR.I-PLG and Policy) Dept., dated 17/08/2024 and consequential Circular of the 2nd Respondent bearing Memo.No.2532904/2024/Ml, dated 21/08/2024 and set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents to continue the petitioner as Town Planning Officer at Vijayawada Municipal Corporation with all consequential benefits, as otherwise the petitioner will be put to heavy and irreparable loss and to pass… 2. There was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on 27.07.2026 as well as on 24.08.2026. Even today, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent-Municipal Corporation filed a counter-affidavit stating that, subsequent to the issuance of the proceedings dated 22.09.2024, petitioner was relieved from the 3rd respondent Corporation on 23.10.2024 vide Proceedings Rc.No.C1- 114814/2024-E.No.69924, dated 23.10.2024. Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submits that the petitioner has joined at the new station i.e., Yerraguntla Municipality and therefore, no cause survive in the present writ petition. In view of the same, as there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner and having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel 4 for the 3rd respondent and averments made in the counter-affidavit, this Court feels that no cause survives for further adjudication of the present writ petition on merits. 3. Recording the above submissions, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Date.21.09.2026 SR