IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 1967 of 2009 Between: E.Naresh Goud S/o.Narsan Goud, R/o.Sindhanoor Ieeja Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector-cum-Programme Co-ordinator, DWMA, Mahabubnagar District. 2 The Project Director/Addl. Programme Co-ordinator (EGS) DWMA, Mahabubnagar District. 3 The Mandal Parishat Development Officer, Ieeza Mandal, Mahabubnagar District. .....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 issue Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in removing the petitioner from the post of Field Assistant of Sindhanoor Village, Ieeza Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, without issuing any notice and without following the due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, against to the principles of natural justice and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to continue the petitioner in the post of Field Assistant of Sindhanoor Village, Ieeza Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, and to grant such other relief or reliefs. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.PRABHAKAR BOMMAGANI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ & RURAL DEV. The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO.1967 OF 2009 O R D E R: This writ petition has been filed questioning the action of the respondents in removing the petitioner from the post of Field Assistant of Sindhanoor village, Ieeza Mandal, Mahaboob Nagar District, without providing even an opportunity for the writ petitioner to set forth his side of the defence. Notice was ordered in the matter on 05th February, 2009 by this court. The learned standing counsel for the Panchayat Raj institutions and Rural Development submits today that the writ petitioner has been reinstated back to duty upon reconsideration of the entire matter. In this view of the development, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for any further adjudication. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J. JULY 03, 2009. Dsh.