IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 15669 of 2008 Between: 1 The District Collector, Visakhapatnam. 2 The Director of Accounts, S.A.C. Barrage, Dhawaleshwaram, E.G. District. 3 The Superintending Engineer, Y.R.P.C. Circle, Kakinada, E.G. District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND A.L. Prasada Rao, R/o. Rachepalli Village, Makavarapalem Mandal, Visakhapatnam 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 to issue a Wrti order or direction more particularly one in the nature of "Writ of Certiorari" calling for the records relating to the orders of the Hon'ble A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad passed in O.A.No.3740/2001 dated 23.12.2005 as being erroneous, illegal and unreasonable and quash the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:GP FOR SERVICES II Counsel for the Respondent No.: . The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU Writ Petition No.15669 of 2008 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) This writ petition is ﬁled seeking to quash the order dated 23-12-2005 passed in O.A.No.3740 of 2001 on the ﬁle of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. 2. The respondent–applicant ﬁled the above O.A. seeking a direction to the petitioners herein to appoint him as Tracer or in any other suitable post pursuant to the proceedings dated 26-8-2000. The case of the applicant was that his land was acquired by the Government for public purpose and he is unemployed graduate and that Government had issued G.O.Ms.No.98 Irrigation (Project Wing) Department dated 15-4-1986 to provide employment to the displaced persons or their dependents on account of their acquisition of land. The Tribunal after considering the rival contentions and orders in similar OAs ﬁled by the applicant, had directed the oﬃcial respondents to appoint the applicant as Tracer or in any suitable post. Aggrieved thereby, the oﬃcial respondents filed this writ petition. 3. Heard learned Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners and perused the record. 4. Learned Government Pleader contended that there are seniors to the respondent, who have not been appointed, and the respondent has to wait for his turn and he cannot ask for preference in appointment. 5. It is seen from the record that the petitioners have not furnished the details of appointment of displaced persons. The judgment was rendered by the Tribunal on 23- 12-2005 and the writ petition is ﬁled in the year 2008. Admittedly, the land of the respondent has been acquired and he was ousted from the land. The authority concerned had not considered the case of the respondent for appointment in spite of positive directions from the Tribunal. Therefore, there are no tenable reasons justifying the rejection of the respondent’s case. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. 6. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed at the stage of admission. ___________________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J. ___________________ C.V.RAMULU, J. 22-07-2008 bsc