IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 20275 of 1999 Between: V.V. Ramana Murthy, S/o Late Seshagiri Rao, Navabharath High School (Telugu Medium), Kakinada, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Education Officer, East Godavari District, Kakinada. 2 Regional Joint Director of School Education, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 3 Director of School Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 4 State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Education Department, Secretariat, Hyderbad. 5 Navabharath Public High School (Telugu Medium), Rep. by its Headmistress, Manager & Correspondent, Bhaskaranagar, Kakinada, East Godavari District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a Writ or Order or Direction especially one in the nature of Mandmaus, i) declare the action of the 5th respondent in discontinuing the petitioner from service without notice and without prior approval of the Educational authorities as illegal, arbitrarty and without jurisdiction; (ii) direct the respondents to continue the petitioner as B.Ed. Assistant in the 5th respondent School; (iii) direct the respondents to regularise the services of the Petitioner as B.Ed. Assistant in the 5th respondent School from the date of initial appointment or from an appropriate date and grant all consequential benifits; and (iv) to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CH.SAMSON BABU Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SCHOOL EDUCATION The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.20275 OF 1999 O R D E R There was no representation on behalf of the petitioner or his counsel when the matter was taken up for hearing on 29.06.2009, 09.07.2009 and 17.07.2009. Accordingly, the matter was directed to be posted ‘for dismissal’ on 23.07.2009. Today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner or his counsel. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs. -------------------------- SANJAY KUMAR,J 23rd JULY, 2009. PGS