IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURBALE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA W.P. No. 4149 OF 2005 Dated : 17th March, 2006 Between: B.Nanda Gopal Petitioner AND The Bank of India, Zonal Office, Represented by its Zonal Manager, Hyderabad and two others Respondents THE HONOURBALE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA W.P. No. 4149 OF 2005 ORAL ORDER: Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not publishing/declaring the result of the petitioner in respect of the interview held on 6.10.2001 in pursuance of the order in WP No. 16698 of 2001 dated 10.8.2001, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to absorb the petitioner as sub-staff, this writ petition is filed. The petitioner was appointed as Safai Karmachari-cum-sepoy in the respondent Bank, Puttur Branch, in January, 1991 It is further averred that the petitioner worked in the Extension Counter as casual employee, on a monthly salary of Rs.175/- from 12.12.1992 to 18.8.1998. Thereafter, the petitioner was removed from the Extension Counter and was made to work at Main Branch of the respondent Bank at Tirupathi where he worked from 19.8.1998 to 3.10.2001. It is stated that, in all, the petitioner worked for 3240 day, but he was not called for interview, though an interview for the said post was conducted on 13.8.2001 calling for the candidates from Employment Exchange. Therefore, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 16698 of 2001 assailing the said action of the respondents, which was disposed of on 10.8.2001 directing the respondents to consider the candidature of the petitioner for the said post by way of direct recruitment, subject to the petitioner fulfilling all the requisite criteria. Consequently, the petitioner was interviewed for the said post on 6.10.2001, but the result of the said interview was not declared. Assailing the same, the present writ petition is filed. The respondents did not choose to file counter affidavit. When the writ petition has come up for hearing, the learned Standing Counsel for the Respondents submits that he has no objection if the writ petition is allowed. Recording the same, the writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. N.V.RAMANA, J. March 17, 2006 MAS.