IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16433 of 2008 Between: A.P. Government Doctors Association, Insurance Medical Services (ESI) Unit, Hyderabad, Rep. byits President, Dr. V. Ramesh, S/o. Seetaramaiah, Aged 49 Years, Civil Surgeon Specialist, ESI Diagnostic Centre, Jeedimetla, Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Principal Secretary to Government,. Labour Employment Training and Factories (IMS) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Smt. G.V.V.S. K. Bhushanam, W/o. Age Not Known, A.P. Insurance Medical Services, Opp: Gandhi Medical College, Musheerabad, 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 an order, direction or writ particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 1st respondent in taking steps to extent or re-appoint the 2nd respondent as Director, in the absence of any statutory rules for such extension or re-appointment even after attaining the age of Superannuation on 31-07-2008, ignoring the complaint submitted by the various associations and pendency of Central Vigilance Enquiry as unconstitutional, highly illegal arbitrary and prays to direct the 1st respondent not to take such steps to extend the services of the 2nd respondent or re-appoint as Director of A.P. Insurance medical Services and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.GANESH Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LABOUR The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (Per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) The grievance ventilated by the petitioner association is that respondent No.2, who, at the relevant time, was working as a Director of A.P. Insurance Medical Services and who retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31st July, 2008 is likely to be re-appointed to the post which she was holding. Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.1 has submitted that respondent No.2 has not been re-appointed to the post, which she was holding. It has been however clarified by him that by an order dated 31st July, 2008, respondent No.2 has been appointed as an Officer on Special Duty in the office of the Director of Insurance Medical Services, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. In view of the fact that respondent No.2 has not been re-appointed or is not to be re-appointed to the post in question by respondent No.1, the grievance ventilated in the petition does not survive. The petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. _________________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ __________________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 17th December, 2008. GRR