IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 1299 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 01/08/2008 in WP NO : 26577 OF 2007 on the file of the High Court.) Between: A.Rajalingam S/o.A.Shankaraiah, 33/11 K.V. Sub-station, A.P.C.P.D.C.L. Pangal, Divisional Office, Wanaparthy, Mahabubnagar Distict. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Superintending Engineer, Operation Circle, A.P.C.P.D.C.L. Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagar District. 2 The Chairman & Managing Director, A.P.C.P.D.C.L. Vidyuth Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant : MR.D.L.PANDU Counsel for the Respondents : P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP T RANSCO) The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT APPEAL NO : 1299 of 2008 JUDGMENT : (Per Hon’ble Sri Anil R.Dave, CJ) Order passed in writ petition No.26577 of 2007, dated 1st August 2008, has been challenged in this appeal. The appellant – original petitioner has been aggrieved because, he has not been appointed to the post of Junior Lineman. It was the case of the respondent that the appellant – petitioner had failed in the pole climbing test. The said fact was stated before this Court by ﬁling counter affidavit. There was no reply given to the said counter affidavit by the appellant – petitioner. Looking to the facts of the case, the learned single Judge came to the conclusion that non-appointment of the appellant – petitioner to the post of Junior Lineman was justified. However, while rejecting the petition, it has been observed that the case of the appellant – petitioner be considered in future, and if at relevant time he is found to be qualiﬁed, he may be given appointment to the post of Junior Lineman. We do not ﬁnd any substance in the appeal. The order passed by the learned single Judge is just and proper. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. _________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ 14th October 2008 ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J ajr