Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/3558/2023 of K V RAMANA REDDY Vs THE GOVERNMENT OF AP 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: 3558/2023 Between: 1. K V RAMANA REDDY, S/O.MALLA REDDY AGED 61 YEARS, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, (NOW
APHC010072152023
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: 3558/2023
Between:
1. K V RAMANA REDDY, S/O.MALLA REDDY AGED 61 YEARS, SUB
INSPECTOR OF POLICE, (NOW COMPULSORY RETIRED) WEST
GODAVARI DISTRICT, ELURU.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE GOVERNMENT OF AP, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME
(SER.II)
DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS,
AP,VELAGAPUDI, AMRAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, AP, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
3. THE
DEPUTY
INSPECTOR
GENERAL
OF
POLICE,
ELURU
RANGE,ELURU
...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 a Writ or Order more in the nature of Mandamus, to the declare the action of the 3rd respondent in continuing the disciplinary proceedings through Memo No317/P/2010 dated 19.02.2011 and the subsequent dissent note Memo No1706374/Ser.II/A1/2022 dated 06.12.2022, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, Violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution Of India, as well as in breach of principles of natural justice, and consequentially set aside the disciplinary proceedings through Memo No317/P/2010 dated 19.02.2011 of the 3rd respondent and the subsequent 1 st respondent dissent note Memo No1706374/Ser.II/A1/2022 dated 06.12.2022, on the ground of delay and latches, charges held not proved, discharged I the criminal case, against GO Ms.No 91GAD (SER-C) Dated 12.09.2022,as well as judgments of the AP High Court and pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2023
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 SUSPEND all further proceedings arising out of 1st respondent dissent note Memo No:1706374/Ser.II/A1/2022 dated: 06.12.2022, and pass such other orders or orders.
IA NO: 2 OF 2023
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 interim orders dated:15.03.2023 in I.A.No.1 of 2023 in W.P.No.3558 of 2023 and dismiss the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. K R SRINIVAS
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR SERVICES I
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 a Writ or Order more in the nature of Mandamus, to the declare the action of the 3rd respondent in continuing the disciplinary proceedings through Memo No317/P/2010 dated 19.02.2011 and the subsequent dissent note Memo No1706374/Ser.II/A1/2022 dated 06.12.2022, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, Violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution Of India, as well as in breach of principles of natural justice, and consequentially set aside the disciplinary proceedings through Memo No317/P/2010 dated 19.02.2011 of the 3rd respondent and the subsequent 1st respondent dissent note Memo No1706374/Ser.II/A1/2022 dated 06.12.2022, on the ground of delay and latches, charges held not proved, discharged I the criminal case, against G.O.Ms.No.91GAD (SER-C) Dated 12.09.2022,as well as judgments of the AP High Court and pass such…”
2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is no more and the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive. Hence, he requests this Court to close this Writ Petition.
3. Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any, shall stand closed.
________________________________ JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI Dated: 07.10.2026 M K K
Writ Petition No. 3558 of 2023 Date: 07.10.2026
M K K