,IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY THE TWELVETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 30981 OF 2011 Between: M. Gunasekhar Reddy … Petitioner V/s. Government of Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Commissioner for Co-operation & Registrar of Co-operative Societies, A.P., Hyderabad & Ors. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri G. Vidya Sagar Counsel for the Respondents : GP for Co-operation Sri Y.V. Ravi Prasad The Court made the following : Order follows next page THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 30981 OF 2011 O R D E R : Heard Sri G. Vidya Sagar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 and the learned standing counsel for respondent No.4. 2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of “Junior Assistant” in the existing vacancy as illegal, arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of “Junior Assistant” in the existing vacancy as per the cadre strength of Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanam Employees Co-operative Credit Society, vide proceedings dated 02-7-2011 and to pass such other suitable orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 3. The case of the petitioner is that fourth respondent-Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams Employees Co-operative Credit Society issued notification, vide its proceedings dated 30-11-1996, inviting applications to various posts in the year 1993. In pursuance of the said notification, the petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant in the Office of the fourth respondent. While so, the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, vide proceedings dated 12-12-1996, directed the Managing Committee of the Society to cancel the appointments and observed that failure to comply with the directions will render the Managing Committee liable for necessary action under the provisions of AP Co-operative Societies Act 7 of 1964. Accordingly, the fourth respondent-society issued proceedings dated 14-12-1996 cancelling appointment made in favour of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said cancellation order, the petitioner and others have filed WP.No. 27100 of 1996 along with WPMP.No. 33467 of 1996 seeking interim suspension of the order of cancellation, pending the writ petition. By order dated 19-12-1996 this Court granted interim suspension of the impugned order and subsequently on 21-03-1997 the said interim orders were made absolute. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents filed WA.No. 1116 of 1997, which was dismissed by this Court by order, dated 03-11-1997 and directed the writ petition to be listed for hearing. Thereafter, the said writ petition was taken up for hearing and ultimately the proceedings issued by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies cancelling the appointment of the petitioner was quashed and directed the fourth respondent to appoint the petitioner without back wages. But so far no appointment order has been issued to the petitioner. 4. Sri G. Vidya Sagar, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had submitted a representation on 17-10-2011 to the fourth respondent requesting the fourth respondent to issue the order of appointment to the post of Junior Assistant in the existing vacancy. Aggrieved by the order passed by this Court in WP.No. 27100 of 1996, the fourth respondent filed W.A.No. 1738 of 2001. The Division Bench of this Court disposed of the writ appeal with an observation that the Registrar of Co-opeartive Societies to cause an enquiry into availability of the posts vis- à-vis recruitment made by the society and if the Registrar finds that the recruitment made by the Society is inconformity with the directions issued by him with regard to filling up of the vacancies, such of those appointments, which are inconformity shall not be disturbed. But however, the appointments made not inconformity with the guidelines issued by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, dated 09-3-1992 or subsequent dates, the said appointment orders shall be cancelled to that extent. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that pursuant to the orders passed by the Division Bench, no orders have been communicated nor the petitioner was reinstated into service. The petitioner made a representation dated 17-11-2007 to the first respondent but the said representation is not disposed of. Feeling aggrieved, the present writ petition is filed. 6. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader appearing for Respondents 1 to 3 submits that the representation dated 17-11-2007 was submitted by the petitioner and the same was received in the office of the respondents on 21-11-2011. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to direct the first respondent to consider and dispose of the representation dated 17-11-2007 filed by the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH. 12-12-2011 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 30981 OF 2011 CIRCULATION NO. DATE 12-12-2011 COURT MASTER : I s L Computer No. 43.