Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16850 (AP)

S. Srinivasulu v. The Correspondent

WP/8117/2014 · 2026-01-27

Harinath N

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010072592014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 8117/2014 Between: 1. S. SRINIVASULU, S/O. S. RAMANAIAH, AGED 49 YEARS, OCC: NIGHT WATCHMAN, 0/O. SRI SARVODAYA COLLEGE, NELLORE, R/O. SRI SARVODAYA COLLEGE COMPOUND, NELLORE-3, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE CORRESPONDENT, SRI SARVODAYA COLLEGE, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, SRI SARVODAYA COLLEGE, NELLORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGE EDUCATION COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, HYDERABAD. 4. THE REGIONAL JOINT DIRECTOR COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, GUNTUR. 5. THE GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD. ...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 appropriate, order or direction more particularly one in the 2 nature of writ of mandamus declare the proceedings issued by the the 1st respondent in Rc.No.SS/HRA/Paid/2014, dated 12-02-2014, as illegal, arbitrary and violations of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, set aside the proceedings of the 1st and 4th respondent in Rc.No.SS/HRA/Paid/2014, dated 12-02-2014 and in Rc.No.916-A2/2013, dated 18-01-2014, respectively IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 10107 OF 2014 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 the operation of proceedings of the 1st respondent in Rc.No.SS/HRA/Paid/2014, dated 12-02-2014 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B SESIBUSHAN RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION 2. M V RAJA RAAM The Court made the following: 3 Order:- Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive any further. Hence, the matter has become infructuous. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N 28.01.2026 PNS