IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 24000 of 2006 Between: N. Lakshmi Reddy S/o. Thimmappa Gorantla Mandal, Ananthapur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Educational Officer, Ananthapur, Ananthapur District. 2 The District Collector, Ananthapur. 3 The Direcor of School Education, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. .....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 of Certiorari calling for all the connected records including the judgment in Original Application No. 2817/03 with M.A Nos. 2915 , 2916 & 2917 of 2005 dt. 25-10-2005 and quash the same as illegal, as illegal, improper unjust arbitrary, and contrary to law and further direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for the post of special teacher/Secondary Grade Teacher as was done in the case others who secured lesser marks with all consequential benefits including seniority, monetary etc., and further direct the respondents to produce the merit marks list of DSC 1985 and pass such other order or orders in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.RAMAMOHAN-MAHADEVA Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 24000 of 2006 Oral Order : ( Per Sri GM, J ) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order dated 25-10-2005 made in OA No.2817/203 with MA Nos.2915, 2916 and 2917 of 2005 by the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. The writ petitioner-applicant has applied for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher for the year 1985. When his name was not considered, he filed RP No.7514/89, and the same was disposed of with a direction to consider his case, if he falls within the zone of consideration. The contention of the petitioner is that some of the individuals, who got lesser marks than him, were appointed to the said posts. It appears, the District Development Officer, Ananthapur has issued a memo dated 26-8-1989 directing the writ petitioner to produce a specific proof with regard to the candidates, who said to have got less marks than him, for verification, but the writ petitioner did not furnish any details as called for the by the respondent-authority. As the claim of the writ petitioner has become stale, the Tribunal opined that the petitioner is not entitled for any relief on account of unexplained laches on his part right from 1989. In the circumstances, we do not see any ground to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _______________ GM, J ______________ CVR, J 23-6-2008 Kk