IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 24080 of 2004 Between: S.Laxmana Murthy S/o.Pilla Loka Chary, Assistant Hydrogeolgist, Office of the Executive Engineer, A.P.State Irrigation Development Corporation Ltd., Khammam Dist. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Vice-Chairman & Managing Director A.P. State Irrigation Development Corp Ltd., Mytri Vanam, 1st Floor, HUDA Commercial Complex, Ammerpet, Hyderabad -38. 2 The Board of Director rep by its Chairman, A.P. State Irrigation Development Corp Ltd., Mytri Vanam,1st Floor, HUDA Commercial Complex, Ammerpet, Hyderabad -38. .....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 a writ or order or direction more in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in not disposing the appeal dt 30-12-1996 against the orders of the respondent No.1 passed in his proceedings No.IDC/MD/ADM/S.11/E47/10/84/7758 dt 5/6-12-1996 awarding punishment of with-holding of two increments with cumulative effect as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Art.14 and 16 of the Constitution of India besides being violative of natural justice; while issuing a consequential direction to the respondents to treat the period from 3-6-1995 to 5-7-1996 as duty with all attendant and consequential benefits in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.D.GOVARDHANACHARY Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.TADDI NAGESWARA RAO The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed against the action of the second respondent in not disposing the appeal dated 30.12.1996 against the order passed by the first respondent awarding punishment of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect. It is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties that the appeal is still pending with the second respondent-Board. Therefore, without going into the merits of the writ petition, a direction can be given to the second respondent-Board to dispose of the appeal in the next Board meeting. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ K.C. BHANU,J Date: 30-12-2004 klp To 1 The Vice-Chairman & Managing Director A.P. State Irrigation Development Corp Ltd., Mytri Vanam, 1st Floor, HUDA Commercial Complex, Ammerpet, Hyderabad -38. 2 The Board of Director rep by its Chairman, A.P. State Irrigation Development Corp Ltd., Mytri Vanam,1st Floor, HUDA Commercial Complex, Ammerpet, Hyderabad -38. 3. 2CD copies