IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 26128 of 2007 Between: P. Veeraiah,. S/o. Ramulu, APGENCO, Nagarjuna Sagar Hydro Electric Scheme, Nagarjunasagar, Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 AP Power Generation Corporation Limited, Vidyut Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad - 500 082. Rep. by its Chairman & Managing Director. 2 The Chief Engineer/Electrical, Operation & Maintenance, Srisailam Dam West, APGENCO, Srisailam, Kurnool District. 3 The Superintending Engineer/Enquiries and Enquiry Officer, APGENCO, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad. 4 The Divisional Engineer/Operation, NS Power House, Pylon, Vijayapuri North, APGENCO, Nagarjunasagar, Nalgonda district. .....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 or order or direction, especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus: i. declare the impugned Memo No. CEE/O&M/SLMW/ADM/IAO-II/U1/F./D.No. 1451/2006 dt. 6-12-2006 issued by 2nd respondent as illegal arbitrary and set aside the same. ii. consequently direct the respondents to refund the amount recovered from the Petitioner's Terminal Benefits in terms of Impugned Memo NO. CEE/O&M/SLMW/ADM/IAO-II/U1/F./D.No. 1451/2006 dt. 6-12-2006 dt. 6-12-2006 issued by the 2nd respondent along with the interest @ 12% per annum Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.VASUDEVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.K.CHIDAMBARAM(SC FOR AP GENCO) The Court made the following : ORDER: Sri Vasudeva Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner filed a letter in the registry seeking permission of the Court to withdraw the writ petition on the ground that subsequent to filing of this writ petition, the 1st respondent herein, who is the appellate authority, vide memo dated 21.10.2008 modified the punishment imposed on him to that of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect. However, he sought liberty to file a fresh writ petition in case the 1st respondent fails to implement the orders dated 21.10.2008. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. No costs. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.16.3.2009 msv