T. Satyanarayana, Visakhapatnam Vs Prl Secy, I & Cad Dept, Hyderabad & 5 Others

T. SATYANARAYANA, VISAKHAPATNAM, S/O T. SURYANARAYANA SIGED 36 YEARS OCC: SENIOR ASSISTANT 0/O EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, INDIRASAGAR LEFT MAIN CANAL DIVISION, YELLAMANCHILI, ZONE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

¶12

...PETITIONER

¶13

AND

¶14

PRL SECY I CAD DEPT HYDERABAD 5 OTHERS, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY I & CAD DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD-500022

¶15

THE ENGINEERINCHIEF AW, I & CAD DEPARTMENT ERRAMANZIL, HYDERABAD-500082.

¶16

THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ISHW CIRCLE, DOWALAISWARAM EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT-537001.

¶17

SRI K YARRANNA, SENIOR ASSISTANT ISLMC DIVISION, YELAMANCHILI OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ISPHW CIRCLE, DOWLAISWARAM ON RE-DEPLOYMENT FROM BRRVP CIRCLE, SRIKAKULAM-529001.

¶18

SRI CH SATYANARAYANA, SENIOR ASSISTANT ISLMC DIVISION, YELAMANCHILI OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, ISPHW CIRCLE, DOWLAISWARAM ON RE-DEPLOYMENT FROM

¶19

BRRP CIRCLE, SRIKAKULAM-529001.

¶20

THE A P ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, REP BY ITS REGISTRAR, HYDERABAD.

¶21

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶22

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of " Certiorari " call for the records relating to order dated 7-8-2014 passed oy the Hon'ble AP Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad in OA No. 4460/2013 and set aside the same as unjust, without any basis and contrary to law and also set aside the proceedings No. AB/EC.2/TSN/733 M dated 16-7-2013 issued by the 3rd respondent and letter No. Rc/ENC/1(1)89146/2008 dated 29-4-2013 issued by the 2nd respondent and also direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Superintendent before considering the claims of the respondents 4 & 5 and promote the petitioner as Office Superintendent with all consequential benefits

¶23

IA NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP 38025 OF 2014

¶24

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 to suspend the order dated 7-8-2014 passed by the Hon'ble AP Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad in OA No. 4460/2013 and also direct the respondents 1 to 3 to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Superintendent before considering the claims of the respondents 4 & 5

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶26

1.M CHINNAPA REDDY

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶28

1.GP FOR GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (AP)

¶29

2.GP FOR SERVICES I (AP)

¶30

3.K B RAMANNA DORA

¶31

The Court made the following:

¶32

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR CHINTALAPUDI

¶33

WRIT PETITION NO: 30420/2014

¶34

ORDER: (per Ravi Nath Tilhari, J)

¶35

Sri M. Chinnapa Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo of withdrawal vide U.S.R.No.73234 of 2026, dated 13.07.2026, with the prayer to permit the learned counsel for the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition.

¶36

The said memo for withdrawal is being reproduced as under:-

¶37

“ MEMO FOR WITHDRAWAL

¶38

“ It is respectfully submitted that the above writ petition was filed challenging the order dated 07.08.2014 passed by the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in O.A.no.4460 of 2013, and seeking to set aside the proceedings No.AB/EC-2/TSN/733-M, dated 16.07.2013, issued by the 3^rd respondent, as well as Letter No.Rc/ENC/1189/146/2008, dated 29.04.2013, issued by the 2^nd respondent. The writ petition also sought a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner’s claim for promotion to the post of Office Superintendent before considering the claims of Respondents 4 and 5, and to grant the petitioner promotion with all consequential service benefits.

¶39

It is submitted that the above writ petition is still pending adjudication. However, the superior officers/Respondents have assured the Petitioner that his claim for promotion will be considered favourably in accordance with the seniority list finalized by the Department.

¶40

In view of the said assurance, the Petitioner has voluntarily decided not to prosecute the above writ petition and seeks permission of this Hon’ble Court to withdraw the same.

¶41

It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to record the same and close W.P.No.30420 of 2014 as withdrawn, while recording the aforesaid assurance extended by the respondents, and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Hence, this memo.”

¶42