IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED WRIT PETITION NO : 2453 of 1995 Between: 1 M.G.Hemachandra S/o.Govindaswamy Gowdu R/o.Kurappalli (V) Reddygunta PO Chittoor District. 2 B.Damodaram S/o.Venkatappa Goudu R/o.4-1890 Durganagar colony Chittoor District. .....PETITIONERS AND 1 The Executive Officer Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams Tirupathi. 2 The Special Grade Dy.Executive Officer (G) Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams Administrative Buildings Tirupathi. 3 The District Employement Officer Chittoor. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 3rd respondent in sponsoring the petitioners for selection to the posts of Asst Photographer/Desk Room Asst in TTD Service as arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the first and second respondent to consider the petitioner for selection to the posts of Asst.Photographer/Dark Room Asst. in TTD Service along with other candidates sponsored by the third respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.JAGAPATHI Counsel for the Respondents Nos: 1 and 2: MR.P.SURESH REDDY, S.C.for T.T.D. Counsel for the Respondent No.3: None appeared. The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition was filed seeking direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for selection to the post of Assistant Photographer/Dark Room Assistant in T.T.D. Service, without insisting that their candidature has to be sponsored by the District Employment Officer, Chittoor. This Court in W.P.M.P.No.3071 of 1995, by order dated 14.02.1995 directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners along with other candidates. It is now represented by the learned Standing Counsel for respondents/T.T.D. that the case of the petitioners has been considered along with other candidates, but they could not come up for selection. Inasmuch as the relief sought for in this writ petition is only non-consideration of the petitioners’ case and inasmuch as it is stated that their case has been considered, nothing survives in this writ petition for adjudication and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. 23.12.2004 MRKR/NRG To 1 The Executive Officer Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams Tirupathi. 2 The Special Grade Dy.Executive Officer (G) Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams Administrative Buildings Tirupathi. 3 The District Employement Officer Chittoor. 4 Two C.D.copies.