Dismissed

Pedavalli Lakshmaiah v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC15 Sept 2026WP/32570/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, Chief Executive Officer of a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society, sought a writ of mandamus to continue in service until age 62 based on a General Body resolution enhancing superannuation age, alleging violation of government orders and Article 14. The petitioner subsequently filed a memo seeking withdrawal of the writ petition, which the court permitted.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions dismissed.

Pedavalli Lakshmaiah Vs the State of Ap — Cooperative Societies | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : Date of uploading :

¶2

APHC010628372025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3460] AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY, THE 16^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 32570/2025

¶9

Between:

¶10

PEDAVALLI LAKSHMAIAH, S/O. KOTAIAH AGE 60 YEARS, OCC- CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER THE GANAPAVARAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED., REG NO. Z.661, GANAPAVARAM VILLAGE, NADENDIA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, R/O. GANAPAVARAM VILLAGE, NADENDIA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, AGRICULTURE AND COOPERATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THE COMMISSIONER FOR COOPERATION AND REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, SHYAMALA NAGAR, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

¶16

THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE OFFICER, NARASARAOPETA AT PALNADU DISTRICT.

¶17

THE DIVISIONAL COOPERATIVE OFFICER, NARASARAOPETA, PALNADU DISTRICT.

¶18

THE GUNTUR DISTRICT COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT, REP BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

¶19

THE GANAPAVARAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, REG NO. Z.661, GANAPAVARAM VILLAGE, NADENDIA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, REP BY ITS CHAIR PERSON / PERSON IN-CHARGE

¶20

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶21

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 topleased to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the respondents in not allowing the petitioner to continue as Secretary of the 6th respondent Cooperative Society till attaining 62 years age in spite of the resolution dated 29.09.2025 passed by General Body of the 6th respondent enhancing the age of superannuation up to the age of 62 years as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to G.O.Ms. No 15 Finance (HR.IV- FRandLR) Department dated 31.01.2022 and as per G.O.Ms.No. 15 dated 04.02.2019 apart from being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent to register the amendment of bye-laws as per the resolution of the General Body of the 6th respondent dated 08.09.2025 and to continue the petitioner in service till the petitioner attain the age of 62 years and pass

¶22

IA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶23

¶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 pleased to DIRECT the respondents to continue the services of the petitioner till the petitioner attains the age of 62 years pending disposal of the writ petition and pass

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶26

1.KAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶28

1.K N VIJAYA LAXMI

¶29

2.GP FOR SERVICES II

¶30

3.T S N SUDHAKAR

¶31

The Court made the following:

¶32

Whether the order is :

¶33

Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No

¶34

¶35

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶36

W.P.No.32570 of 2025

¶37

O R DE R:

¶38

Learned counsel for the Petitioner filed memo dated 11.09.2026 seeking permission of the Court for withdrawal of the

¶39

writ petition

¶40

Permission as sought for is accorded.

¶41

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to

¶42

costs.

¶43

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall stand

¶44

dismissed.

¶45

___________________ NYAPATHY VIJAY, J

¶46

Date: 16.09.2026

¶47

KLP

Pedavalli Lakshmaiah v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pedavalli Lakshmaiah v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases