IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 6521 of 2004 Between: P. Rajaiah, S/o Galaiah, Age 30 years, Occup: Contract Labour, O/o The Divisional Engineer Electrical (OP), A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Ltd, Siddipet, R/o Dumpala Pally, Dubbak Mandal, Medak District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1.The Chairman & Managing Director, A.P. Transmission Corporation Ltd, Singareni Bhavan, Hyderabad. 2. The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Ltd, Medak at Sangareddy. 3 The Divisional Engineer (Electrical), Operation, A.P.Central Power Distribution Company Ltd, Siddipet, Medak 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 any appropriate writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the letter No. SE/OP/MDK/PO/ADM/D.No. 1884/2003, dated 21-11-2003, in rejecting the case of the petitioner for appointment as Typist against the quota of contract labour in the respondent Corporation is as arbitrary, illegal and violation of Article 14, 16 and 21 of the constitution of India, consequently direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment as Typist against the quota of contract labour in the respondent corporation by setting aside the impugned letter Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.G.CHANDRAIAH Counsel for the Respondents.: MR.S.RAVINDRANATH The Court Made the Following : ORAL ORDER:- By a communication dated 21-11-2003, the petitioner’s request for appointment as Typist pursuant to a scheme of regularization of services in B.P.Ms.No.36 dated 18- 05-1997 was rejected by the respondents—A.P.CPDCL on the ground that the petitioner does not possess the qualification for appointment as Typist and that the genuineness of his service certificate evidencing his employment with a Contractor could not be established due to lack of corroborating evidence. Aggrieved by such rejection, the petitioner preferred an appeal/representation to the 1st respondent and has also filed this writ petition. He now does not wish to pursue the writ petition, but seeks to pursue the appeal/representation he made to the 1st respondent. In the light of the request urged on behalf of the writ petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as ‘withdrawn’, while directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of the appeal/representation dated 02-12-2003 expeditiously and in any event within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. ______________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 06-07-2004 Pvks/* To 1.The Chairman & Managing Director, A.P. Transmission Corporation Ltd, Singareni Bhavan, Hyderabad. 2.The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, A.P. Central Power Distribution Company Ltd, Medak at Sangareddy. 3. The Divisional Engineer (Electrical), Operation, A.P.Central Power Distribution Company Ltd, Siddipet, Medak District. 4. 2CD copies