IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 1390 of 1999 Between: 1 Shiv Shankar Singh Radhaswamy Colony, Jagannath Bhavan, Secunderabad 2 Dhanraj Singh Qts.No.TTs.A45,Jyothi Nagar N.T.P.C Ramagundam ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 Indian Railways Construction Company(IRCON)International Ltd Rep: by its Managing Director Palika Bhavan, New Delhi. 2 Joint General Manager Indian Railway/Construction Company68, Jagadish Bhavan, 2nd floor Sikh Road, Secunderabad. 3 The Project Incharge Indian Railway Construction Company (IRCON) International Limited N.T.P.C Complex Ramagundam Karimnagar. .....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 direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing Lr.No.IRCON/SECBAD/PF/67, dt.16-1-1999 and Notification dt.145-1-1999 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and also violative of articles 14,16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to setaside Lr.No.IRCON/SECBAD/PF/67, dt.16-1-1999 and notification dt.15-1- 1999 and to treat us at regular employees from the date of our initial appointments and further direct the respondents herein to promoter us to higher posts 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.P.RATTAIAH Counsel for the Respondent No.: MS.G.SUDHA The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.1390 OF 1999 ORDER: There was no representation on behalf of the petitioners or their counsel when this matter was taken up for hearing on 18.06.2009, 25.06.2009 and 29.06.2009. The matter was directed to be listed “for dismissal” today and as there was no representation in the morning session, the case was passed over. However, there is no representation even in the post lunch session on behalf of the petitioners or their counsel. The learned counsel for the respondents is present. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as to costs. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. 3rd July, 2009. VGSR / PGS