Dismissed¶58

M. Muna Swamy Reddy, Chittoor District. v. the Divisional Cooperative Officer, Tirupathi, and Another

Andhra Pradesh HC23 Apr 2025WP/16949/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Non-prosecution dismissal of a 2005 Andhra Pradesh writ petition (Art. 226) by a co-operative bank Attender-cum-Electrician seeking regularization of service and pay-scale fixation; petitioner untraceable, cause-survival left open with two-month liberty to revive; no costs; interim Section 151 CPC petition closed; single-judge order, AP High Court Amaravati, 24-04-2025; useful only for procedural point on disposal of stale/untraceable-petitioner writ matters, not on regularization merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution without costs; liberty to file an appropriate application within two months if the cause survives; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed. ¶58

M. Muna Swamy Reddy, Chittoor District. Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition dismissed for non-prosecution without costs; liberty to file an appropriate application within two months if the cause survives; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.

¶58

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution, given that the petitioner is untraceable and it is unknown whether he is still in service and whether the cause survives.

¶41

Court's answer

The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution.

¶43

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is preserved: if the petitioner feels that the cause in the writ petition still survives, he may file an appropriate application within a period of two months from the date of the order.

¶43

Key takeaways

There shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶43
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court (Amaravati), single judge (Ravi Cheemalapati J.), 24-04-2025 — Writ Petition No. 16949 of 2005, M. Muna Swamy Reddy v. The Divisional Cooperative Officer, Tirupathi & others. Petition of 2005 under Article 226 sought mandamus to regularize the petitioner's service as Attender-cum-Electrician in the Tirupathi Co-Operative Bank with regular pay scale and consequential benefits, and to declare arbitrary the respondents' direction that he not attend office without notice or order; an interim petition under Section 151 CPC sought his continuance in service. On 24-04-2025, learned counsel reported that the petitioner was not available at the given address, his whereabouts could not be found, and there was no information whether he was still in service or whether the cause survived. Recording the submission, and noting the petition was of the year 2005 with the petitioner having no interest in prosecuting it, the court dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution, without costs, while permitting the petitioner to file an appropriate application within two months if he felt the cause still survived; miscellaneous petitions, if any, were directed to stand closed. No precedent was cited and no question on merits was decided.

¶1

[3332 ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 16949 OF 2005

¶8

Between:

¶9

M. Muna Swamy Reddy, 3/6. Subramanyam Reddy, aged about³⁵ years. Working as Attendfr-cum-Electrician, Tirupathi Co-Operative Bank, Tirupathi, Chittoor District.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

1 The Divisional Cooperative Officer, Tirupathi, Chittoor District.

¶12

The Tirupathi Co-Operative Bank rep. by Chairman, Tirupathi, Chittoor District.

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction directing the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner as Attender -cunirEtectrician by fixing regular pay scale and other consequential benefits in the 2nd respondent bank forthwith by

¶14

declaring the action of the respondents in directing the petitioner not to attend the office without issuing any notice and without passing any order as

¶15

arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional.

¶16

J A, NO: 1 OF 2005(WPMP. NO: 21547 OF 7nni;|

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the respondents herein to continue the petitioner as Attender-cum-Electrician in the 2nd respondent bank.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶19

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI M RAVINDRANATH REDDY

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR COOPERATION

¶21

The Court made the following: .

}

APHC010041562005

[3332]

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶27

PRESENT

¶28

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO: 16949/2005

¶30

Between:

¶31

M. Muna Swamy Reddy, Chittoor District.

¶32

...PETITIONER

¶33

AND

¶34

The Divisional Cooperative Officer, Tirupathi & others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶35

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶36

1.TNAGARJUNA REDDY

¶37

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶38

1.M RAVINDRANATH REDDY

¶39

2.GP FOR COOPERATION

¶40

The Court made the following order:

¶41

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is not available at the given address and his whereabouts^{couldnotfoundandthere} is no information as to whether the petitioner is still^{inserviceandwhetherthe} cause in the Writ Petition survives or not.

¶42

Recording the said submission, since the Writ Petition is of the year 2005 and the petitioner has no interest in prosecuting the case, the Writ

¶43

Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. However, if the petitioner feels that the cause in the Writ Petition still survives, he can file appropriate application within a period of two (2) months from today. There^{shallbenoorderasto} costs.

¶44

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall^standclosed.

¶45

//TRUE COPY//

¶46

Sd/- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

¶47

To,

¶48