THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA W.P. No. 17338 of 2006 Oral order: The petitioners, who are five in number, are working as Security Head Guards in AP GENCO. They have filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the respondents to follow the procedure contemplated in B.P. Ms. No. 419, dated 18.06.1975, for promotions to the posts of Security Sub-Inspectors in pursuance of the Selection Examination conducted in terms of Memo No. C(V&S)/PO(Vig)/D.No.19/2006-12, dated 12.05.2006. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 intend to withdraw the writ petition, and prayed that the writ petition be dismissed as withdrawn as against petitioner Nos. 1 to 4. He however, submitted that the petitioner No. 5 intends to contest the matter, and prayed that the writ petition be disposed of on merits. The respondents though filed detailed counter. The learned Standing Counsel representing them that the selection process with respect to promotions to the post of Security Sub-Inspectors is pending, in that viva-voce is not yet conducted, and that they would follow the procedure contemplated in B.P. Ms. No. 419, dated 18.06.1975, while making promotions to the posts of Security Sub- Inspectors, and then only announce the results, and that it is too premature for petitioner No.5 to contend that the respondents would not follow the procedure contemplated in B.P. Ms. No. 419, dated 18.06.1975, while making promotions. In view of the stand taken by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, that the respondents would follow the procedure contemplated in B.P. Ms. No. 419, dated 18.06.1975, while making promotions to the post of Security Sub-Inspectors, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: The writ petition, as against petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 is dismissed as withdrawn. The respondents shall follow the procedure contemplated in B.P. Ms. No. 419, dated 18.06.1975, while making promotions to the posts of Security Sub-Inspectors. In the event, petitioner No.5 is not selected, and if he feels that the respondents while making promotions have not followed the procedure contemplated in B.P. Ms. No.419, dated 18.06.1975, he is at liberty to assail his non-selection in appropriate proceedings. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Dated: 5th March, 2007. KSR