IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 5717 of 2000 Between: Mir Yawar Ali Khan S/o Late Mir Jahandar Ali Khan O/o Chief Electrical Inspector, R/o H.No.23-5-100/1, Opp. MCH, Shaali Banda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal Rep. by its Registrar Hyderabad. 2 State of A.P., Rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Energy Department Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The Chief Electrical Inspector, Govt. of A.P., Mint Compound, 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 isue a Writ, order or direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Ceriorari calling for the records in O.A.No.6479 of 1998 dated 16.3.2000 on the file of A.P.Administrative Tribunal and quash the same and further declare that petitioner is ineitled to be treated to have been promoted as Office Superintendent w.e.f. 22.4.1995 or 27.4.1995 and further decalre that Memo No. Adm.ROC/E2/98-99-110 dated 12.1.1999 as illegal and arbitrary and that petitioner is entitled to all other consequential promotions including promotion to the category of Assistant Accounts officer from February, 1997 and pass such order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may dem fot and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.SURENDER RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR FORESTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION No.5717 of 2000 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Swaroop Reddy) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner expired on 21-07-2001 and no steps have been taken to bring his legal representatives on record. However, it is stated that the legal representatives want to come on record and in case the writ petition is allowed, they would be entitled to the financial benefits of the petitioner, Anyhow, it is not in dispute that the sole petitioner expired long back on 21-07-2001 and so far no steps have been taken to bring his legal representatives on record. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as abated. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J _____________________ P.SWAROOP REDDY, J Date: 08-07-2009 Prv