Dismissed¶30

Yakasiri Sudhakar , v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC6 Apr 2025WP/16840/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition 16840/2018, Yakasiri Sudhakar and Others v. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, decided 07.04.2025 by Dr. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa. Dismissal of writ petition as infructuous where petitioners ceased working in the organization and cause did not survive; challenge was to dispensation of services for want of technical qualifications (Procs. No.05/2017/SB dated 27.04.2018; Gruha Mitra circular dated 05.12.2016); Article 226; no order as to costs; pending applications closed; no merits adjudicated; no precedent discussed.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed since the relief has become infructuous, the petitioners being no longer working in the organization and the cause not surviving; no order as to costs. ¶30

Yakasiri Sudhakar , Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

APHC010361742018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

[3396]

¶6

MONDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16840/2018

¶9

Between:

¶10

Yakasiri Sudhakar, and Others

¶11

...PETITIONER(S)

¶12

AND

¶13

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶14

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶16

1.K MOHAN RAMI REDDY

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶18

1.KALYAN CHAKRAVARTHY R

¶19

2.GP FOR HOUSING (AP)

¶20

The Court made the following:

¶21

¶22

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16840 of 2018

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with

¶25

the following prayer for:

¶26

“…to issue an appropriate Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in Procs. No.05/2017/SB dated 27.04.2018 dispensed the services of the petitioners on the ground that they are not having technical qualifications basing on the letter of the 2nd respondent dated 14.04.2018 bearing Lr.No.A5/1205/OWSI/2018 contrary to his own circular dated 05.12.2016 bearing No. A5/4833/2017/Gruha Mitra, being illegal, arbitrary, unilateral and unconstitutional and consequently set aside the same and to grant…”

¶27

Heard Sri K. Mohan Rami Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioners and Sri R.Kalyan Chakravarthy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶28

It is represented by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents that the petitioners are not working in the organization and cause does not survive in this Writ petition.

¶29