THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8070 of 2010 ORDER: In this writ petition, petitioners, who are working in the Office of the third respondent - Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Guntur, have questioned the validity of G.O.Rt.No.257, Higher Education (CE-1-2) Department, dated 07.04.2010 issued by the first respondent – Government of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Higher Education, Secretariat, Hyderabad. At the first instance, the first respondent issued G.O.Rt.No.31, dated 18.01.2010 appointing the fourth respondent as Full Additional Charge of the post of Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Guntur, and the fifth respondent as Administrative Officer in the Office of the third respondent. Subsequently, the Government issued Memo bearing No.10296 / CE–1–2 / 2009-4, dated 22.01.2010, keeping G.O.Rt.No.31, dated 18.01.2010 in abeyance. Aggrieved by the said Memo, the fourth and fifth respondents have filed O.A.Nos.1622 and 1623 of 2010 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad (for short ‘the Tribunal’), which, in turn, passed interim order, dated 18.03.2010 suspending the above-mentioned Memo and ordered to continue the fourth and fifth respondents in accordance with G.O.Rt.No.31, dated 18.01.2010. In compliance of the said order of the Tribunal, the first respondent issued G.O.Rt.No.257, dated 07.04.2010, which is impugned herein. It is the case of the petitioners that the fourth and fifth respondents harassed them, as such, they submitted representations to the first and second respondents, but in vain. It is submitted that questioning G.O.Ms.No.31, dated 18.01.2010, they filed W.P.No.567 of 2010, in which, this Court on 28.01.2010 while adjourning the matter, recorded the statement of the learned Government Pleader that the first respondent is not implementing the G.O. impugned therein and it is kept in abeyance. Therefore, the fourth and fifth respondents ought not to have filed the above-mentioned O.As before the Tribunal without impleading the petitioners as party respondents therein. A perusal of the impugned G.O. clearly shows that it has been issued in compliance of the interim order, dated 18.03.2010 passed by the Tribunal in the O.As filed by respondents 4 and 5. If for any reason, the petitioners are aggrieved, they can as well move the Tribunal by filing appropriate application seeking their impleadment as party respondents in the O.As, but independently, they cannot question the impugned G.O. before this Court. In any event, as the impugned G.O. has been issued in compliance of the order passed by the Tribunal, it cannot be said that the same is illegal and arbitrary. Hence, the impugned G.O. needs no interference by this Court. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is dismissed. However, it is open to the petitioners to approach the Tribunal by filing appropriate application in the O.As seeking their impleadment as party respondents therein. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 12th APRIL, 2010. Note: issue c.c. in two (2) days. kvni