The Government Of Andhra Pradesh Rep. By Its Principal v. P.Moharnmed Rafi,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE SANJAY KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE M.GANGA RAO WRI T PETI TI ON NO.17358 OF 2014 ORDER: (per SK,J) Challenge in this writ petition by the Government of Andhra Pradesh and its police authorities is to the order dated 11.02.2014 passed by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in O.A.No.972 of 2014. By the said order, the Tribunal opined that the matter was squarely covered by its earlier order dated 25.04.2013 passed in O.A.No.1493 of 2013 and batch and allowed the O.A. Aggrieved thereby, the authorities filed this writ petition.

By order dated 26.06.2014, this Court granted interim suspension of the order under challenge.

Learned Government Pleader for Services, Andhra Pradesh, would contend that the Tribunal was in error in holding that the matter was covered by its earlier adjudication as this was not a case where the authorities failed to abide by the due procedure before removing the first respondent-applicant from the rolls of the Home Guards Organisation. Perusal of the record reflects that this is so in as much as five notices dated 30.06.2010, 07.07.2010, 15.07.2010, 17.07.2010 and 30.08.2010 and a final show cause notice dated 30.08.2010 were issued to the first respondent-applicant in relation to his unauthorised absence calling upon him to submit his explanation. Despite the same, the first respondent-applicant did not choose to do so.

In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the authorities failed to abide by the due procedure laid down by the relevant rules and the edict of this Court in State of Andhra Pradesh v. P.Prasad Rao1. We are now informed by Sri M.V.S.Sai Kumar, learned counsel for the first respondent-applicant, that the first respondent-applicant expired about a year ago. However, no steps have been taken by the legal representatives to come on record if the cause survives. In that view of the matter, as the first respondent-applicant expired and no steps have been taken by his legal representatives, we close the writ petition recording that the cause in the O.A. filed by the first respondent stands abated.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand closed. No order as to costs.

_______________ SANJAY KUMAR,J ______________ M.GANGA RAO,J Date:27.08.2018 GJ 1 2012 (1) ALD 76