IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE 2nd DAY OF DECEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6822 OF 2000 Between: N.Srinivasa Rao … Petitioner And Government of A.P. and others … Respondents This Court made the following: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY WRIT PETITION No.6822 OF 2000 ORDER: - This writ petition is filed by the petitioner for issuing a writ of Mandamus directing respondents to absorb the services of the petitioner into the post of typist in respondent No.3-K.B.N.College, Vijayawada. It is the case of the petitioner that initially he was appointed as clerk by proceedings, dated 13.04.1988, and he worked in the said capacity with utmost devotion. Having satisfied with the services of the petitioner, respondent No.3-college absolved him as Junior Assistant- cum-typist by proceedings, dated 20.11.1996, and since then he was discharging the duties in the said college as typist. Consequent upon the promotion of one G.S.N.Acharyulu, who was working as a typist in an aided post, to the post of Senior Assistant, a vacancy arose in the post of typist. As the petitioner’s services were utilised as a typist, he made an application, dated 09.12.1999, to absorb him in the aided post as typist. Since no action has been taken on the said application, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. While admitting the writ petition, this Court by order, dated 26.04.2000, directed respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the case of the petitioner for absorption into the post of Typist within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of that order. On petitioner filing WP.MP.No.16746 of 2000, this Court vide order dated 17.08.2000 modified the order passed earlier on 26.04.2000 in WP.MP.No.8975 of 2000, directing respondent No.1 to consider the case of the petitioner for his absorption to the post of typist, instead of respondent Nos.2 and 3. There is no complaint by the petitioner that the said request of the petitioner has not been considered so far. When the writ petition is taken up for hearing on 25.11.2010, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Hence it was directed to be posted under the caption for dismissal. Even today also there is no representation nor any grievance is made by the petitioner that his case was not considered as directed by this Court in WP.MP.No.8975 of 2000, dated 26.04.2000, and as modified in WP.MP.No.16746 of 2000, dated 17.08.2000. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for absorption by disposing of the application made by him on 09.12.1999, if not already considered, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J December 2, 2010 lmv