IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 19943 of 1999 Between: Mr.B.L.Srinivasulu, S/o. B.Lachanna, Bank of India, Puttur Branch, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Bank of India, Rep. by it's General Manager, Express Towers, Niriman Point, Mumbai. 2 The Zonal Manager, Andhra Pradesh Zone, Bank of India, P.T.I.Building, A.C.Guards, Hyderabad - 500 004. 3 Chief Regional Manager, Bank of India, Hyderabad Region, P.T.I.Building, A.C.Guards, Hyderabad. .....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 order or orders or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaing the impugned (Inter Office Memorandum) Zo.PERS.Js. 2626, dt.22-10-1998 issued by 2nd Respondent refusing the claim of the petitioner to grant 2 addl. increments by virtue of the graduate certificate issued by Indian Army on the gdround that the two Addl.Increments for graduation will be given to those who have passed degree course conducted by any recognised universities in our country as arbitrary, illegal, descriminatorym, and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequentially direct the resondens to grant two assl.increments on the basis with the graduate (employees) who have passed degree course conducted by any recognised universities in our country from 10-10-1998i.e., the date on which and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.CHANDRAIH NAIDU Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.M.V.K.VISWANADHAM The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 19943 of 1999 ORAL ORDER There was no representation for the petitioner or his counsel when this matter was taken up for hearing on 02.07.2009. Thereafter when the case was taken up for hearing on 17.07.2009 a request was made on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner for an adjournment. Acceding to the same, the writ petition was adjourned finally to 23.07.2009. However, as there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner or his counsel on the said date also it was directed to be posted for dismissal on 24.07.2009. Today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner or his counsel. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. ______________ SANJAY KUMAR,J 24th JULY,2009 TSNR