IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13175 OF 2000 Between: Annaluru Venkateswarlu, S/o.Venkata Subbaiah, R/o Nagasamudram Village, Kalaigiri Mandal, Nellore District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector, Nellore, Nellore District. 2 The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kavali, Nellore District. 3 The Commissioner of Land Revenue, Nampally Station Road, Hyderabad. .....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 or order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by calling the records in O.A.No.1575/1994 on the file of the Hon'ble A.P.Administrative Tribunal and examine the legality, propriety and correctness of the said order and consequently quash the same, as illegal arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to appoint the petitioner as Village Administrative Officer of Nagasamudram Village, Kaligiri Mandal, Kavali Division, Nellore District and pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI T.C. KRISHNAN Counsel for the Respondent No. : GP FOR SERVICES II The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice P. Swaroop Reddy) The petitioner Annaluru Venkateswarlu, who was aged 56 years, filed this writ petition seeking appointment as Village Administrative Officer (for short “VAO”). He was not qualified for the post of VAO at that time, subsequently he got qualified by passing VII Class. 2. In view of the fact that the writ petition is of 2000 and now we are in 2009, the petitioner, who was aged 56 years at the time of filing this petition itself, has crossed the age of retirement long back; as such, the cause in this petition does not survive requiring any further adjudication and thus the matter has become infructuous. 3. Therefore, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. ____________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J July 23, 2009. ____________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J PV