Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/10737/2026 of GANJI VENKATA RAO Vs THE UNION OF INDIA on 2 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY, THE 3rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 10737/2026 Between: Ganji Venkata Rao ...PETITIONER AND The Union Of India and Others
APHC010201482026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 3rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI
WRIT PETITION NO: 10737/2026
Between:
Ganji Venkata Rao
...PETITIONER
AND
The Union Of India and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
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.
1. BOPPUDI ALEKHYA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. SRINIVASA RAO NARRA
2. ALEKHYA TADASINA(CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL) The Court made the following order:
Challenging the orders passed by the 3rd respondent dated 27.03.2026 in appointing an Ad-hoc committee by dissolving the existing Divisional Union, without authority, the present writ petition is filed.
2. Heard Ms Alekhya Boppudi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Srinivasa Rao Narra, learned counsel for respondents.
3. When the matter is taken up for consideration today, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner has retired from the service on attaining age of superannuation, therefore nothing remains for adjudication and prayed to dismiss the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner did not dispute the same.
4. In view of the same, since the petitioner has already retired from service on attaining age of superannuation, there remains nothing for adjudication and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
Miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI BRS