2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 4614
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
HARINATH.N
Dr. Uvaraj Sreerama Chandar S/o. late S.Nageswara Rao – Appellant
Versus
The Director of Medical Education – Respondent
WP 12421/2013
APHC010511332013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3457]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 12421/2013 Between:
1. D R. UVARAJ SREERAMA CHANDAR, S/O. LATE S.NAGESWARA RAO,, OCC: LECTURER IN BIO-PHYSICS, C/O. DR. KALIDASU, BHARATHINILAYAM, OPP: RIMS MEDICAL COLLEGE, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. T HE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD.
2. M /S RAJIVGANDHI INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL, SCIENCES (RIMS), REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
1. J U M V PRASAD
1. GP FOR MED HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE The Court made the following:
ORDER:-
The petitioner is seeking a direction from this Court to continue his service till he attain the age of 65 years. The petitioner is a Lecturer in Biophysics in the 2nd respondent’s institute. The petitioner is relying on the Regulation No.48 of Act 31 of 2007 and seeks a direction that his services be extended till the petitioner attains the age of 65 years.
2. It is the contention of the petitioner that similar placed contract employees were extended till they attained the age of 65 years and seeks the similar directions.
3. The 2nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner was engaged for a period of five years and he was relieved from service on 21.05.2013. That apart, it is further stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner’s services were not satisfactory and that his conduct at the workplace were also not up to the expected standards. It is also submitted that his initial employment was for a period of five years and after completion of tenure, he was relieved from his duties.
4. Considering the contentions of the petitioner and the respondents, the grievance of the petitioner cannot be adjudicated, as the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation and his services were dispensed with soon after completion of the term of engagement as on 21.05.2013. On these considerations, no further adjudication on merits is required.
5. Recording the same, the writ petition is closed. No order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date.19.01.2026 SR