IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 9039 of 2005 Between: A.Subrahmanyeswara Rao, S/o.A.Ramakrishnaiah, 205 Noble Saphire, Motinagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Managing Director, The A.P.State Co-operative Bank Ltd., Troop Bazar, Hyderabad. 2 Shri M.S.Rama Rao, General Manager, (Vigilance) (officiating) The A.P.State Co-operative Bank, Troop Bazar, Hyderabad. 3 Shri K.Kameshwara Rao, Deputy General Manager (Vigilance) (officiating), the A.P.State Co-operative Bank ltd., Troop Bazar, Hyderabad. 4 The A.P.State Co-operative Bank Ltd., rep.by its Managing Director, Troop Bazar, Hyderabad. ....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ one in the nature of Mandamus and any other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the suspension of the petitioner from the service by the respondents vide orders Nos. Est./F.524/1495 dated 23-1-2002, VC/Est./DA-134/871 dated 17-4- 2003, VC/Est./DA-134/952 dated 16-10-2003, VC/Est/DA-134/ 379 dated 10-4-2004, No.VC/DA/134/421 dated 30-6-2004, VC/Est/ DA- 134/539 dated 18-10-2004 as arbitrary, illegal, ultra vires service Regulations, unreasonable and violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to pay full salary to the petitioner during suspension period along with consequential benefits and also direct the respondents to take back the petitioner into service. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Y.SRINIVASA MUKHERJEE Counsel for the Respondents: MR.D.S.N.V.PRASAADA BABU FOR MR.A.H.RAMA KRISHNA RAO. The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 9039 of 2005 ORDER: This very writ petition is filed challenging the order of suspension of the petitioner from service pending enquiry into certain allegations made against him. While admitting the writ petition, no stay was granted. Now it is brought to the notice of the Court that the petitioner was proceeded departmentally during the pendency of the writ petition and the disciplinary authority passed order of dismissal from service on 20.02.2008. Therefore, this Writ Petition has become infructuous and as such, the same is dismissed as infrcutuous. _________________ C.V.RAMULU, J. Date: 28.02.2008. GS