IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 9425 of 1999 Between: 1.J J Choudhary S/o purushotham Hyderabad 2.G Kubera Rao S/o G.V.Chalapathi Rao Warangal 3.G Narsimham Divakar S/o Narsimham Hyderabad 4.J Viswapathi Sastry S/o J Subramanyam Hyderabad 5.M Veerendranath S/o Gopala Krishnaiah Hyderabad 6.A R Gokul S/o Ananthaiah Medak District 7.J Udai Kumar S/o Jaganatha Prasad Punjagutta, Hyderabad 8.J Venkateswarlu S/o Seetha Ramaiah Habsiguda, Hyderabad 9.T Murlaidhar Rao S/o T V V Krishna Rao Gunfoundry Branch, Hyderabad 10.Johnsunder Rao S/o P Jacob Himayathnagar Branch, Hyderabad ..... PETITIONERS. AND State Bank of Hyderabad rep. by its M.D. Head Office, GunFoundry, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the method adopted by the respondent bank in subrecting the re erst while order-I officer including petitioners to repeated interview but declining promotions an par with their batch mates even in absence of adverse remarks during the relevant years of consideration, as arbitrary and illegal and contrary to judgement of Hon'ble Court in WA 470 of 1983 dt: 27-11-1987 as confirmed by Apex Court in SLP 6174/85 dt:12-10- 96 and Consequently direct the respondents to reconsider the petitioners for promotion to MM Grade-III and next higher orders on par with their batch mates duly maintaining interse-Seniority in grade-I, with all Consequential benefits there of and pass such other order/orders as the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interests of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners:MR.C.S.V.RAMANA MURTHY Counsel for the Respondent: MR.G.VIDYASAGAR The Court made the following : ORDER: Sri C.S.K.V.Ramana Murthy, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the writ petition has become infructuous. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. _______________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J) 26th February, 2008 v v To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies