IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 8738 of 1999 Between: 1 Union of India Rep.by General Manager, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad. 2 Chief Personnel Officer, South Central Railway, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad. 3 Divisional Railway Manager, South Central Railway, Vijayawada. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Smt. R.Swaraj Laxmi, Railway Junior College, Kazipet, Warangal District. 2 Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad. 3 R.T. Patil, Guntakal, Anathapur District. 4 A.R. Anjaneyulu, Guntakal, Anathapur District. 5 Sudam Namdev Kandare, Guntakal, Anathapur District. 6 C.V.L. Narayana Rao, Bitragunta, Chittoor District. 7 T.Kutumba Rao, Bapatla, Guntur District. 8 A.H.Khan, Kazipet, Warangal District. 9 J.Satyanarayana, Kazipet, Warangal District. 10 M.K.Prabhavathi, Kazipet, Warangal District. 11 Smt. K.Janaki Lalaguda, Secunderabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction thereby quashing the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad passed in O.A. No. 1057 of 1996 dt. 4.1.1999 as null and void and allow the Writ Petition with costs through out and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.GOURI SHANKAR SANGHI Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KMR} HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY W.P.No.8738 of 1999 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) Though this Court, by order dated 01-12-2004, granted three weeks’ time for compliance of the office objections, in default, the writ petition stands dismissed against the contesting respondent No.1, who is the applicant in O.A.No.1057 of 1996, on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, the office objections have not been complied with and therefore, the writ petition was dismissed for default against the respondent No.1. As the writ petition itself was dismissed against the contesting respondent No.1, no relief can be granted against the first respondent. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _________________________ JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH _____________________________ 15th June 2009 JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY Kvr