HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21396 of 2007 Dated: 22-06-2010 Between: Kasaram Srinivas & others. … Petitioners And The Andhra Pradesh Northern Power Distribution Company Limited, Hanmakonda, Warangal District, rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director & others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21396 of 2007 ORDER: Though interlocutory applications are listed for hearing, as the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents have requested for disposal of the main writ petition in view of the orders passed during the pendency of the writ petition, this writ petition itself is taken up for hearing and is being disposed of. In the writ petition, the petitioners seek for directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in not considering their claim for appointment to the post of Junior Lineman on contract basis, by giving preference to their apprenticeship training in the A.P.Northern Power Distribution Company Limited, in the roster points earmarked for Scheduled Tribe candidates, as illegal and arbitrary. By way of interim order, dated 9th of October 2007, passed in W.P.M.P.No.27754 of 2007, this Court directed the respondents to consider the claim of petitioners. During the pendency of the writ petition, individual orders are passed by the respondents on 10.07.2008, considering and rejecting the claims of petitioners. In the said orders, it is stated that the apprenticeship training was given to the petitioners in general functioning of the Distribution Company on administrative side, and that the petitioners are not given any training in manning and maintenance of Sub-stations. It is further stated that the contract labour worked in Sub-stations alone, are considered for appointment as contract Junior Linemen. On the aforesaid ground, the claim of petitioners is rejected. In view of the reasoned order rejecting the claim of petitioners, no further directions can be granted in the writ petition. If the petitioners are aggrieved of the subsequent orders passed during the pendency of the writ petition, they can as well question the said orders. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is dismissed, giving liberty to the petitioners to question the orders, dated 10.07.2008. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 22nd June 2010 ajr