IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.14579 of 2008 Between: 1 Dr. V.Srinivas, S/o. Sudhakar Rao, R/o. H.No.1-2-48/1/30, Domalguda,Hyderabad-29 2 K.R.L.Sarma, S/o. K.V.S.Sarma, R/o. Plot No.50, S.P.Nagar, Moula Ali, Hyderabad. 3 G.Surya Prasad, S/o. Thukaram,. R/o. 2-75,Lalgadi Malkpet, Shamirpet(M), Ranga reddy District. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 The Commissioner & Director of Collegiate Education, Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 Thirumala Thirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. Rep by its Executive Officer. 3 S.V.V.V.S.College, No.170, Old Airport Road, New Bowenpally, Secunderabad. rep by its Principal. ...RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate writ or order or directions, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus i) declaring the action of the 2nd & 3rd respondent in not renewing the contract of the petitioners as lecturers for the academic year 2008-09 by entering into a fresh agreement , as arbitrary illegal, violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Art. 14, 21 of constitution of India. ii) a direction may be issued to the respondents to renew the contract of the petitioners as lecturers by entering into a fresh agreement for the academic year 2008-09 iii) costs be awarded. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.B.MAHENDER REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.14579 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioners were selected and engaged as Contract Lecturers by the second respondent to work in the third respondent-Institution for a limited period. On expiry of the contractual period, their services were disengaged. This Writ Petition is filed with a prayer to direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to renew the contract of the petitioners as Lecturers. On behalf of the respondents, counter affidavit is filed making a detailed mention about the nature of appointment of the petitioners on earlier occasion and the manner in which they were came to be disengaged. Ultimately, it is stated that a fresh notification for the current academic year has been issued on 05.07.2008 and that the petitioners have also submitted applications in response to the same. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education for the first respondent and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3. It is not disputed that the earlier engagement of the petitioners is for a limited period. After the expiry of the contract, they were disengaged. Hence, no exception can be taken for such action of the respondents in disengaging the petitioners. So far as the current academic year is concerned, a notification has already been issued and the petitioners also submitted their applications. It hardly needs to mention that the respondents would consider the petitioners also along with other eligible candidates in accordance with law. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. _____________________ (L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J) 9th July 2008 RRB