Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/25278/2024 of M. Surya Rao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 6 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3573] WEDNESDAY, THE 7th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 25278/2024 Between: 1. M. SURYA RAO, S/O KAMESWARA RAO AGE 59 YEARS, OCC- JUNIOR LINEMAN H.NO 14-156,
APHC010486052024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE 7th DAY OF OCTOBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI
WRIT PETITION NO: 25278/2024
Between:
1. M. SURYA RAO, S/O KAMESWARA RAO AGE 59 YEARS, OCC- JUNIOR
LINEMAN
H.NO
14-156,
ANJANEYUPURAM,
CHEEPURUPALLI,
VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT-535128
2. D.V.S.R. RAJESWARI, W/O R.S.ANAND AGE 59 YEARS, OCC- JUNIOR
LINEMAN VINAIK TOWERS- C BLOCK, BACKSIDE OF NAIDU FUNCTION
HALL CHEEPURUPALLI, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT-535128
3. P. VYKUNTA RAO, S/O MOHANA RAO( LATE) AGE 59 YEARS, OCC- JUNIOR LINEMAN H.NO 14-136A, ANJAYAPURAM, CHEEPURUPALLI, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT-535128
4. M. RAMA RAO, S/O PYDINAIDU AGE 59 YEARS, OCC- JUNIOR LINEMAN
CHUKKA
VALASA
VILLAGE,GARIVIDI
MANDAL,
VIZIANAGARAM
DISTRICT-535125
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, AGRICULTURE AND COOPERATIVE
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING,VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR COOPERATION AND REGISTRAR OF
COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, D.NO 2-16-83, NEAR SKYLARK TOWERS LINE SYAMALANAGAR, GUNTUR- 522006.
3. THE DISTRICT COOPERATIVE OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT
4. THE CHEEPURUPALLI RURAL ELECTIC COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, REP
BY
ITS
MANAGING
DIRECTOR/DEPTY
REGISTRAR,
CHEEPURUPALLI, VIZAINAGARAM DISTRIC
5. THE ANDHRA PRADESH EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY
LIMITED, REP BY ITS SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION
CIRCLE, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT
...RESPONDENT(S):
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 to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not implementing the resolution passed by the 5th respondent dated 21.03.2020 for increasing the age of retirement from 58 years to 60 years to the Petitioner as per G.O.Ms.No.l02, Dt.27.06.2017 r/w G.O.Ms.No.l38, Dt.08.08.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.15, (HR, IV - FR and LR) Department Dt.31
02.2022, which is as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently Direct the 5th respondent to reinstate and continue in the services of the petitioner in the 5th respondent society and implementing the resolution passed on 21-03-2020 for rise the age of superannuation from 58 year to 60 years to the petitioner, as per G.O.Ms.No.l02, Dt.27.06.2017 r/w G.O.Ms.No.l38, Dt.08.08.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.15, (HR, IV - FR and LR) Department Dt.31.02.2022, and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024
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 may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 5, to reinstate and continue into the services as per the resolutions passed by the 5th respondent dated 21.03.2020 to the petitioner by rising the age of superannuation from 58 year to 60 years as per the G.O.Ms.No.l02, Dt.27.06.2017 r/w G.O.Ms.No.ISS, Dt.08.08.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.15, (HR, IV - FR & LR) Department Dt.31.02.2022 or consider petitioner representation letter dated 27-08-2024
and pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. CH S V SURAJ
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. A VEERASWAMY
2. V V SATISH (SC for APEPDCL)
3. GP FOR SERVICES II
The Court made the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The Writ Petition is filed for the following relief:
“…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not implementing the resolution passed by the 5th respondent dated 21.03.2020 for increasing the age of retirement from 58 years to 60 years to the Petitioner as per G.O.Ms.No.l02, Dt.27.06.2017 r/w G.O.Ms.No.l38, Dt.08.08.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.15, (HR, IV - FR and LR) Department Dt.31 02.2022, which is as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently Direct the 5th respondent to reinstate and continue in the services of the petitioner in the 5th respondent society and implementing the resolution passed on 21-03- 2020 for rise the age of superannuation from 58 year to 60 years to the petitioner, as per G.O.Ms.No.l02, Dt.27.06.2017 r/w G.O.Ms.No.l38, Dt.08.08.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.15, (HR, IV
- FR and LR) Department Dt.31.02.2022, and to pass…”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed memo dated 01.10.2026 stating that petitioners are intending to withdraw the present Writ Petition. As such, he seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this Writ Petition.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________ JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Dated: 07.10.2026 M K K
Writ Petition No. 25278 of 2024 Date: 07.10.2026
M K K