IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 6701 of 1999 Between: 1 B. Syamsunder, S/o. Krishna Murthy, R/o. 4/389-2, Vivekanandanagar, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 2 V.Maruthi Siva Kumar, S/o. Srinivasulu, R/o. 7/137-1, NGO Colony, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 3 M.Venkata Seshaiah, S/o. Subbanna, R/o. 20/648, Balaji Street, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 4 S.Rama Krishna, S/o. Venkata Subbaiah, R/o. 6/666, Shankarapuram, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 5 S.Murali Krishna, S/o. Subbaramaiah, R/o. 2/649, Srihari Rao Street, Nagarajupet, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 6 P.Srinivasulu, S/o. Venkatappa, R/o. 1/1697, R.S.Road, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 7 Y.Raja Anand, S/o. Y.V.Krishnaiah, R/o. 17/21-14, Y.V.St., Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 8 S.Yoga Surendranath, S/o. S.L.Gangaiah, R/o. 20/93, Akula Street, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 9 S.Venkata Subbaiah, S/o. Ramakrishnaiah, R/o. 2/114, Maruthi Nagar, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. 10 C.Venkata Ramana Reddy, S/o. C.Nagireddy, R/o. Thuvvapally, Pandi Kunta Post, Galiveedu Mandal, Cuddapah District. 11 P.Dakshina Murthy, S/o. P. Rama Subbaiah, R/o. 20/583, Namasthe Board Lane, Madras Road, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 A.P. TRANSCO (Erstwhile A.P.S.E.B.) Rep. by its Member Secretary, Vidyut Soudha, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. 2 Superintending Engineer, Opetation Circle, AP TRANSCO (Erstwhile A.P.S.E.B.), Cuddapah, Cuddapah, Cuddapah District. .....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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondnets in rejecting petitioners case for appointment for the suitable post on the ground that as per Award in I.D.No.78/92 they do not come under the purview of contract labour and also 11335/94, dt.11-2-1994 (Act 2 of 1974) and they are not in Letter No.SE(O)/CDP/ADM/C2/FSF/D.No. 1915/98 dt.18-9-98 as illegal, unjust, arbitrary and unconstitutional and to the extent it restricts the benefit of regualr contractor alone is arbitrary and discriminatory and petitioners in the suitable existing posts with all grant such other relief or reliefs as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.SANKARAYYA Counsel for the Respondent No.: P.R.BALARAMI REDDY(SC FOR AP TRANSCO) The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO. 6701 OF 1999 ORDER: Since none appeared for the petitioner on 26.3.2008, the writ petition was directed to be posted “for dismissal”. Today though the writ petition is listed under the caption ‘for dismissal’, neither is the counsel for the petitioner present nor is there any representation on his behalf. The writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No order as costs. _______________________________ Date: 09.04.2008 RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J MRKR To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KRD} c