IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY FRIDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JANUARY, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY WRIT PETITION No.23943 of 2002 Between: D.Thirupathi and nine others. … Petitioners And Northern Power Distribution Co., of A.P., Ltd., Reptd., by its Chief General Manager/HRD, Warangal and another. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: None. Counsel for the respondents: Sri P.R.Balarami Reddy. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioners as junior linemen in furtherance of the interview conducted on 28-1-1999, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners also sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to issue appointment orders to them. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioners. Heard Sri P.R.Balarami Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, and perused the record. The petitioners, who claimed to be ex-contract labourers applied for absorption as junior linemen against the posts earmarked under B.P.Ms.No.36, dated 18-5-1997. They were interviewed on 28-1-1999. As the result of the interview was not communicated to the petitioners, they filed Writ Petition No.24742 of 1999. The petitioners averred that inspite of the interim order granted by this Court directing the respondents to announce the results of the interview, the respondents have not complied with the said order. Therefore, they filed the present Writ Petition. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.2 it is, inter alia, averred that the respondents called for vigilance report regarding the genuineness of the service certificates of the petitioners; and that report dated 25-7-2002 sent by the vigilance authorities revealed that the experience certificates produced by the petitioners are not genuine. It is further stated that on receipt of the said report, a detailed order was passed on 16-12-2002 and communicated to the petitioners by rejecting their cases for absorption. No reply affidavit is filed denying the averments contained in the counter-affidavit and no one represented the petitioners to point out the illegalities, if any, in the action of the respondents in rejecting the claim of the petitioners for absorption. For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:30-1-2009 MNR