IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO:18241 of 2001 Between: 1 Ch.Balarama Murthy S/o. Narayana R/o. Door No. 70-2-38/2, Vinayakanagar, Ramanaiahpeta, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 2 Gadi Ram Babu S/o. Krishna Murthy R/o. Door No. 1-17-5, Sunkara Vari Street, Kondayyapalem, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 3 Nallam Pulla Rao S/o. Venkata Reddy R/o. Door No.68-8-22/B1, Behind S.B.I. Officers Colony, Ashoknagar, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 4 Lanka Dhana Veera Venkata Rao S/o. Narayana Rao R/o. Door No. 9-134, Near Sivaji Theatre, Indrapalem, Kakinada, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 A.P. Power Transmission Corporation Limited, Rep. by its Director, Vidyut Soudha, Hyderabad. 2 A.P. Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, Visakhapatnam. 3 Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, A.P.E.P.D.C. Ltd., Rajahmundry, East Godavari District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:NONE APPEARED Counsel for the Respondents:MR.P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in rejecting the petitioners’ cases for regularisation to the post of Lower Division Clerk in accordance with B.P.Ms.No.36, dated 18.05.1997 as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioners sought for invalidation of letters, dated 08.07.2001 issued by respondent No.3 whereby their cases were rejected. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioners. Heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and perused the record. In the impugned letters by which the petitioners’ cases for absorption were rejected, respondent No.3 stated that the service certificates produced by the petitioners at the time of interview were found to be not genuine as per the report of the Vigilance Wing. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Assistant Secretary (Legal), AP TRANSCO, it is inter alia stated that respondent No.3 called for reports from the Vigilance Cell on the genuineness of the certificates produced by the petitioners and thereupon, the Vigilance Cell conducted investigation, obtained relevant material and reported that there was no substantial proof that they worked under the respective contractors. It is further stated that after the list was published following the interview vide memo, dated 05.05.2001, the certificates submitted by all the candidates including the petitioners were sent for verification by the Vigilance Cell, which in turn, verified and reported that the experience certificates produced by the petitioners were not genuine based on which the impugned letters were issued. No reply-affidavit is filed by the petitioners. At the hearing, no one is present to point out the illegality, if any, contained in the impugned letters. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 23rd JANUARY, 2009. kvni