THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT APPEAL NO.18 OF 2006 ( DATED : 06.01.2006) Between: K.Abraham S/o Brahmaiah, Aged about 45 years, R/o Madhira, Khammam District. …Petitioner A n d Andhra Pradesh Northern Power Distribution Company Limited rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, Warangal & 2 others …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT APPEAL NO.18 OF 2006 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) Heard both sides and at their request, the main appeal itself is taken up for disposal. The unsuccessful writ petitioner is the appellant herein. In the writ petition, the appellant sought for a Mandamus to consider and dispose of the representations dated 02.12.1995 and 15.09.2004 submitted by him for considering his case for appointment with effect from the date on which his juniors were given the appointment order as Helper (JLM) on the basis of the length of service as Ex- Casual Labour with all consequential benefits including all other benefits. A learned single Judge of this Court after going through the merits dismissed the writ petition holding that the petitioner is not entitled to any such relief. Hence the present appeal. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the writ petition came to be disposed of at the admission stage itself. Further, it is his case that the request made is only for consideration of his representations. Having heard the counsel on either side and on perusal of the material, it is seen that, no doubt, the appellant/petitioner sought the relief of considering his representations. But, however, on facts, the learned single Judge has found that the petitioner is not entitled to any such relief. Be that as it may, once the request made is for consideration of the representations, it is not necessary for us to go in to the merits of the case, more so, in the absence of a counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents. In view of the same, it would suffice in the interests of justice, to direct the respondent authorities to consider the representations filed by the Appellant- petitioner. The writ appeal is accordingly partly allowed. The respondents are directed to consider and dispose of the representations of the petitioner within a period of one month. It is needless to mention that the respondents shall consider the case of the Appellant/Petitioner uninfluenced by any observations made by this Court. No order as to costs. _______________ B.PRAKASH RAO, J _________________ Dr. G.YETHIRAJULU, J 06th January, 2006 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT APPEAL NO.18 OF 2006 (Judgment of the Bench delivered by Hon’ble Sri Justice B.Prakash Rao) DATED : 06.01.2006