IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.7284 of 2009 Between: A. Kamalamma W/o. A. Dharmareddy R/o. D.No. 6-13-57, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Colony Tirupathi, Chittoor District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam Rep. by its Board of Trustees Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 2 The Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam Tirupathi, Chittoor District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR. J.UGRA NARASIMHA Counsel for the Respondents:MR. D.SETHURAMI REDDY(SC FOR TTD) The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.1 in numbering and disposing of the appeal filed by the petitioner for payment of salaries for the period from 13.09.2003 to 02.05.2007, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner was appointed as Sweeper in respondent No.1 Devasthanam in 1969. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against her by respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 passed order, dated 10.09.2003 whereby the petitioner was compulsorily retired. The petitioner filed an appeal questioning the said order before respondent No.1, which, by resolution, dated 15/16.10.2004 resolved to reinstate the petitioner with prospective effect. Without implementing the said resolution, respondent No.2 recommended to the Government for implementation of his order, dated 10.09.2003. However, by G.O.Rt.No.1120, Revenue (Endowments- III) Department, dated 16.05.2006, the Government affirmed the resolution passed by respondent No.1 directing the petitioner’s reinstatement. Consequently, the petitioner was reinstated into service. The petitioner then filed a statutory appeal before respondent No.1 against the order of respondent No.2 for the relief of treating the period of absence from 30.09.2003 to 02.05.2007 as on duty and for payment of salaries for the said period. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said appeal has neither been numbered nor disposed of so far. Having heard Sri J.Ugra Narasimha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D.Sethurami Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents and in view of the fact that the relief claimed in the present writ petition is innocuous, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.1 to dispose of the appeal said to have been filed by the petitioner against order, dated 10.09.2003 of respondent No.2, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.9545 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 8th APRIL, 2009. kvni