THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.30784 of 1998 DATED:29.01.2008 Between: Abba Narsaiah and others. …Petitioners And The District Collector and another. ..Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.30784 of 1998 ORDER: Questioning the action of the respondents in not appointing the petitioners as Asaldhar Village Servants of Allor Village, Armoor Mandal, Nizamabad District, pursuant to the memo, dated 24.01.1996, as illegal and arbitrary, the present Writ Petition is filed. The petitioners seek a consequential direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioners as Asaldhar Village Servants, on rotation basis, with all consequential benefits. A detailed counter-affidavit was filed, wherein the respondents have categorically stated that pursuant to the consent having been given by the petitioners for appointment of 19 persons, 19 persons were appointed and are working as Village Servants, on regular basis and that these 19 persons, who have been appointed and are working as Village Servants, had purchased the shares of the writ petitioners and the writ petitioners had executed a deed in their favour. In the light of the specific averment and in the absence of any denial by way of a reply-affidavit, I see no reason to disbelieve what has been stated in the counter-affidavit and inasmuch as the petitioners have, indeed, given their consent for appointment of 19 persons, the relief sought for, by them, in the present Writ Petition, cannot be granted. Sri S.Satyam Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, would contend that it is only the 9th petitioner who had given consent, and that the other petitioners have not. Learned counsel would state that he has a copy of the agreement and he seeks permission of this Court to place it on record. The specific assertion in the counter-affidavit can be rebutted only by way of a specific denial through a reply-affidavit, and along with that reply-affidavit, the petitioners may have been entitled to file any document, which they desired to rely upon. In the absence of any reply-affidavit being filed denying the assertions made in the counter- affidavit, I see no reason to examine the document sought to be passed across the bar. Taking note of the specific averment in the counter-affidavit that the petitioners have given their consent for appointment of 19 persons as Village Servants, the relief sought for in the Writ Petition cannot be granted. The Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. __________ 29.01.2008 GJ