IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.16175 of 2008 Between: 1 Rama Mohana Rao S/o.Krishna Murthy, Construction Division, Kurnool District. 2 D.Pullaiah S/o Pullaiah, A.P.C.P.D.C.l Opp.K.V.R College Kurnool. 3 M.Subba Rao S/o.Narsoji Rao, Superintedent Engineer A.P.C.P.D.C.L Pay Roll Section (PRS), Kurnool. 4 C.Giridhar S/o.Nagappa, O/o.Assistant Divisional Engineer(Distribution/Sub Division) A.P.C.P.D.C.L Opp.K.V.R. College, Kurnool. ...PETITIONERS AND 1 The C.P.D.C.of A.P Ltd Rep.by its Chairman & Managing Director Corporate Office, Singareni Bhavan Red Hills Hyderabad. 2 The Chief General Manager(HRD) APCPDCL Singareni Bhavan,Red Hills Hyderabad. 3 The Superintending Engineer(Operation) APCPDCL Kurnool District 4 Mr P.Krishna S/o.not Known age not known The Assistant Accounts Officer ERO Yemmiganur Kurnool District. ....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus by calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 3rd respondent vide Memo No.SE/KNL/ADM/PO/JAO/S3/D.No.1431/08 dt.23/06-2008 and Memo No..SE/KNL/ADM/PO/JAO/S3/D.No.1591/08 dt.05-07-2008 and set aside the same to the extent of the benefit conferred on 4th respondent by declaring it as illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioner for promotion to the post of J.A.Os with all incidental and consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.PEETA RAMAN Counsel for the Respondents: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY (SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.16175 of 2008 ORDER: Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to the petitioners to assail the Rule, which comes in the way of their promotion. Permission is accorded. The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, leaving it open to the petitioners to assail the Rule, which, according to them, is coming in the way of their promotion. _____________________ (L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J) 25th July 2008 RRB