Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 17555 (AP)

Pattem Hari Babu v. Sri.Dr. V.S.Srinivasa Murthy

CC/548/2022 · 2026-01-27

D Ramesh

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010085892022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH CONTEMPT CASE NO: 548 OF 2022 AND WRIT PETITION NO: 9392 OF 2020 CONTEMPT CASE NO: 548 OF 2022 Between: 1. PATTEM HARI BABU, S/O SREENIVASULU, 58Y, OCC. GRADE-I TECHNICIAN, MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, KSRM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KADAPA, D.NO.3/1779, RAJA REDDY STREET, KADAPA TOWN, YSR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. SRI DR V S SRINIVASA MURTHY, PRINCIPAL OF K.S.R.M COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KADAPA, YSR DISTRICT. ...CONTEMNOR Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MALIREDDY GOWTHAM Counsel for the Contemnor: 1. C SRINIVASA BABA WRIT PETITION NO: 9392 OF 2020 Between: 1. PATTEM HARIBABU, FATHER NAME. SREENIVASULU, AGE. 58, KSRM COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, KADAPA, YSR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STAT OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY ADDRESS. HIGHER EDUCATION DEPT, SECREARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE COMMISSIONER, STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING ADDRESS. ANR TOWERS, PRASADAMPADU, KRISHNA DISTRICT 3. ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION, INDIRA GANDHI SPORTS COMPLEX, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHI-2 4. ADMISSION AND FEE REGULATORY COMMITTEE AFRC, NRI BLOCK, C-BLOCK, NH-16, TADEPALLI, GUNUTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. KSRM ENGINEERING COLLEGE, REP BY ITS., PRINCIPAL KADAPA, YSR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MALIREDDY GOWTHAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR EDUCATION (AP) 2. C SUDESH ANAND 3. C SRINIVASA BABA The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH CONTEMPT CASE NO: 548 OF 2022 AND WRIT PETITION NO: 9392 OF 2020 COMMON ORDEER: The Writ Petition No.9392 of 2020 is filed questioning the action of the Respondent No.5 in issuing the impugned intimation letter dated 13.05.2020 contemplating to retire the Petitioner on attaining the age of 58 years, though the age of superannuation extended to 60 years as illegal and arbitrary. 2. Considering the submissions made, this Court has granted interim order in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in W.P.No.9392 of 2020, dated 28.05.2020 directing the Respondents to continue the Petitioner in service as Grade-I technician in Respondent No.5/ College. Consequently due to violation of the orders of this Court, the Petitioner filed C.C.No. 548 of 2022. 3. Learned counsel for the Respondents/ Contemnors has brought to the notice of this Court that during pendency of the matters, the Petitioner was died on 30.12.2024. Subsequently based on family member certificate and death certificate, the Respondent Authorities have considered and released all the benefits to the legal heirs of the Petitioner. To that effect, he filed a letter to the Registrar (Judicial) on 15.12.2025. The same is not disputed by learned counsel for the Petitioner. 4. Considering the submissions made, nothing survives in the Writ Petition as well as Contempt Case. 5. Accordingly, both Contempt Case and Writ Petition are closed. The miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date: 28.01.2026 KK