IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7360 of 2000 Between: The General Manger Ordinance Factory Project Yeddumailaram Medak Dist- 502 205 ..... PETITIONER AND Sri G.Balraj Goud S/o.Shankaraiah R/o.Guntapalli Kondapur Mandal Medak District .....RESPONDENT 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 issue an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of certiorari calling for the records in RA.No.2/2000 in OA.No.1705/98 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench and quash the order dt.11/02/2000 in the said RA and pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.P.KISHORE RAO W.P.NO.7385 of 2000 Between: The General Manger Ordinance Factory Project Yeddumailaram Medak Dist- 502 205 ..... PETITIONER AND Sri G.Balraj Goud S/o.Shankaraiah R/o.Guntapalli Kondapur Mandal Medak District .....RESPONDENT 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 issue an order, direction or writ more particularly one in the nature of certiorari calling for the records in OA.No.1705/98 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench and quash the order dt.11/11/1999 in the said OA and pass such other order. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.RAJASEKHAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.P.KISHORE RAO The Court made the following : COMMON ORDER: (Per Sri V.Eswaraiah, J.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent was one of the sponsored candidate by the employment exchange and his name was stood at serial No.9 and pursuant to the notification six candidates were appointed and the remaining candidates were kept in panel and subsequently during the pendency of the writ petitions the interim order was vacated and the respondent was appointed and therefore the writ petitions have become infructuous. Recording the above submission, the writ petitions are accordingly dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. ___________________ P.SWAROOP REDDY, J. 20.7.2009 kpr