IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 25922 of 2008 Between: Y. Vishnu, S/o. Late Krishna Rao, (Under Suspension), A.P.E.P.D.C.L., Vizianagaram, R/o. Vizianagaram, Vizianagaram District. ..... PETITIONER AND Chief General Manager, H.R.D. / A.P.E.P.D.C.L., (Andhra Pradesh Eastern Power Distribution Company Ltd.) Corporate Office, Visakhapatnam. .....RESPONDENT 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 of mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the action of the respondent herein in not taking any action for reinstating the petitioner into service by revoking the suspension order in Memo No. HRD/DCPO-IV-FO, 170-06(VZM) D.No. 975/06, DT. 26-6-2006, pursuant to the GO Ms.No. 526, General Administration issued by the respondent corporation vide T.O.O. (Addl.Secy.Per) Ms.No. 165, dt. 3-10-2008 and E.O.O. (HRD) Ms.No. 244, dt. 27-10-2008, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and for a consequential order directing the respondent to reinstate petitioner into service forthwith pursuant to the above GO., and consequential orders of the respondent, by considering the representation of the petitioner dt. 25-8-2008. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.DHANAMJAYA Counsel for the Respondent No.: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: “This Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent herein in not taking any action for reinstating the petitioner into service by revoking the suspension order in Memo No.HRD/DCPO- IV-FO, 170-06 (VZM) D.No.975/06, dated 26-06- 2006, pursuant to the G.O.Ms.No.526, General Administration (Services-C) Department, dated 19-08-2008 and consequential order directing the respondent to reinstate petitioner into service forthwith pursuant to the above GO., and consequential orders of the respondent, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 25-8-2008.” Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Corporation, and at their request, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. It is the case of the petitioner that he was suspended on the allegation of possessing disproportionate assets and ACB rides. Thereafter, he made a representation for revocation of suspension but the same was not considered by the respondents. The petitioner contends that because of long pendency of the suspension he is entitled for revocation of the suspension order as per G.O.Ms.No.526 dated 19-08-2008. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Corporation submits that since the petitioner has already made a representation to the respondents seeking revocation of the suspension order and the same is still pending consideration before the respondents instead of this Court going into the merits of the matter the respondents may be directed to consider the same, for which course of action learned counsel for the petitioner also agreed. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 25-08-2008 and pass appropriate orders in the light of G.O.Ms.No.526 dated 19-08-2008 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt o f a copy of this order. No order as to costs. __________________ 27th November, 2008 SKM