IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 33604 of 1998 Between: 1. Ms. D.Krishna Kumari, W/o. D.V.N.Raju, R/o. 4-155, Durganagar, Madhuravada, Visakhapatnam. 2. Ms. N.Jaya Rao, W/o. R.Malleswara Rao, R/o. H.No. 39-33-102, Plot No. 178, Visakhapatnam Urban Development Authority Lay out, Madhava Dhara, Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1. Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Education Dept., Education Department , Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2. Commissioner of Colegeate Education, Nampally, Hyderabad. 3. A.V.N.College, rep. by its Secretary and Correspondent. Visakhapatnam, .....RESPONDENTS 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 a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in refusing to consider the case of the petitioners in pursuant to the Judgment of this Hon'ble Court in W.P. No. 22154/96 and W.P. 22155/96,dated 16-10-96 while considering the case of the petitioners only under G.O.Ms.No. 328 , Education, dated 15-10-97 imposing a rigorous burden agains the petitioners to pass certain tests after superceding G.O.Ms.no. 302, Education,dated 23-8-91 under G.O.Ms.No.328 Education,dated 15-10- 97 and considering the cases of the juniors to the petitioners ahead of Consideration of the petitioners to loose their seniority in the cader as illegal, void, arbitrary, discriminatory and opposed to rule of law and consequently to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner under G.O.Ms.No. 302, Education, dated 23-8-91 as existed within two months from the date of the Judgment in W.P. 22154/96 and W.P. 22155/96, dated 16-10-96 and to give all consequential benefits and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MUMMANENI.SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No1&2.: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.3.: SRI SITARAMA MURTHY The Court made the following : ORDER: Sri Mummaneni Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the writ petition has become infructuous. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as infructuous. _______________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J) 22nd February, 2008 v v To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies