Dismissed

Guttula Venugopalam v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Dec 2024WP/26200/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh closed the writ petition filed by a petitioner regarding non-payment of salaries. The petitioner submitted that their grievance was considered following directions given by an earlier interim order of this court dated 08.08.2017.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition No. 26200/2017 closed; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

Guttula Venugopalam Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

APHC010286292017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

[3333]

¶6

WEDNESDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 26200/2017

Between:

Guttula Venugopalam

...PETITIONER

AND

The State of Andhra Pradesh and 2 others

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶17

1.K MOHAN RAMI REDDY

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶19

1.A S C BOSE

¶20

2.M S R CHANDRA MURTHY

¶21

3.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV (AP)

¶22

The Court made the following:

¶23

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

¶26

“…. to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2^nd respondent in not taking action for paying the salaries due to the petitioner from the date of re-admission into service on 14.9.2016 as Field Assistant of V.Savaram village, Rayavaram Mandal, East Godavari District onwards to till date inspite of the letter of the 3^rd respondent dated 24.6.2017 bearing Rc.No.A/1/2017, as being illegal, arbitrary, unilateral and unjust …”

¶27

2. When the matter came up for admission on 08.08.2017, this Court passed the following interim order:

¶28

“…..It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that in pursuance to the directions of this Court in earlier writ petition No.22931 of 2016 the petitioner was readmitted into duties vide proceedings No.E/74/EGS/DWMA/2009, dated 14.09.2016 of the 2^nd respondent, but he is not paid the salary.

¶29

In view of the same, there shall be directions to the 2^nd respondent to pay the outstanding salary of petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

¶30

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in pursuance of the

¶31

interim order granted by this Court on 08.08.2017, the grievance of the petitioner was considered. Therefore, the cause in the writ petition does not survive, and requested this Court to close the writ petition.

¶32

¶33

Recording the above submission, the Writ Petition is closed. There

¶34

shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Petition shall stand

¶36

closed.

¶37

¶38

JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶39

Date:04.12.2024 KGR

Guttula Venugopalam v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guttula Venugopalam v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arimilli Rama Krishna Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Chalapathi Sneha Latha Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

P.Fareed Khan Vs State of Ap

K.Shiva Prasad, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Principal

K.Padmavathi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Mrs. Madugula Anitha W/o. K.Ramesh Vs State of Andhra Pradesh