Dismissed¶¶37

K Nagamuni v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Dec 2025WP/5607/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

K Nagamuni v. State of AP and others, W.P.No.5607 of 2023 (AP High Court, Amaravati; Nyapathy Vijay, J.; decided 05.12.2025): writ petition by an Executive Director of the BC Corporation seeking extension of age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years at par with Government servants under G.O.Ms No. 15 Finance (HR.IV-FR and LR) dated 31.01.2022 and related orders/Supreme Court SLP orders; DISMISSED as infructuous — petitioner had already crossed 62 years and the cause of action did not survive; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions dismissed as a sequel.

What did the court decide?

As on the date of the order the petitioner had already crossed 62 years, and therefore the cause of action did not survive for adjudication. ¶¶36

K Nagamuni Vs the State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

APHC010110372023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

[3460]

¶5

FRIDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 5607/2023

¶9

Between:

¶10

K NAGAMUNI, S/O. GAMPANNA, AGED 59 YEARS, OCC.EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BC CORPORATION, ANANTHAPUR, ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, BC WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, (B.C WELFARE DEPARTMENT), ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT AT ANANTHAPUR.

¶15

THE VICE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, AP BC COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORPORATION, VIJAYAWADA

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the

¶18

¶19

High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, By declaring the action of the respondents, more particularly 1st respondent, in not extending the benefit of age of superannuation up to 62 years in terms of G.O.Ms No. 15 Finance (HR.IV-FR and LR) Dated 31.01.2022 as unjust, improper and contrary to the orders issued in GOMs No.138 dt.08-08-2017 and the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 14033-14034/2017 dated 05-05-2017 including orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No.13623/2017 dated 09-08-2017 in the matter of applicability of age of superannuation to the petitioner at par with the Government servants. Hold that the petitioner herein is entitled for continuation of his service up to the age of 62 years in terms of G.O.Ms No. 15 Finance (HR.IV-FR and LR) Dated 31.01.2022, GOMs No.138 dt.08-08-2017 and the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP Nos. 14033-14034/2017 dated 05-052017 including orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 13623/2017 dated 09-08-2017. and Consequently direct the 3rd respondent to continue the services of the petitioner till the age of 62 years, with all consequential by extending the same benefit that was conferred to the employees covered by G.O.Ms No.15 Finance (HR.IV-FR and LR) Dated 31.01.2022 and pass

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶21

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 pleased to continue the petitioner in the service till the age of 62 years in terms of G.O.Ms No. 15 Finance (FIR.IV-FR and LR) Dated 31.01.2022, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and pass

¶22

IA NO: 2 OF 2023

¶23

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 pleased to vacate the

¶24

¶25

interim order dated.07.03.2023 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in WP No.5607 of 2023 and dismiss the said Writ Petition and pass

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶27

1.MORTHA SRINU BABU

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶29

1.GP FOR SERVICES II

¶30

2.KALISETTI APPA RAO(Standing Counsel for APBC Finance Corporation)

¶31

The Court made the following:

¶32

¶33

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶34

W.P.No.5607 of 2023

¶35

ORDER:

¶36

This writ petition is filed for the benefit of extension of age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years. As per the writ affidavit, the Petitioner was due to retire on 31.03.2023. As on date, the Petitioner has crossed 62 years and the cause of action does not survive for adjudication.

¶37

The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶38

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand

¶39

dismissed.

¶40

__________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J

¶41

Date: 05.12.2025

¶42

KLP

K Nagamuni v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K Nagamuni v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N K Raghava Reddy Vs the Andhra Pradesh State Co-Operative Rural Irrigation Cprporation Limited

K Rama Subba Reddy Vs the District Employement Officer

Karanam Sudhakar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Ayub Khan, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

N Satyanarayana Babu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B.v.Krishna Reddy, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh